kalm wrote:Chris Christie Pushed Port Authority To Give Contract To Jerry Jones' Firm
http://m.ibtimes.com/chris-christie-pus ... rm-1774154" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
No suprise

kalm wrote:Chris Christie Pushed Port Authority To Give Contract To Jerry Jones' Firm
http://m.ibtimes.com/chris-christie-pus ... rm-1774154" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sounds like a bunch of retards were running the NFL back in those days. Most absurd rules I've ever heard. Makes absolutely no sense..JoltinJoe wrote:I don't know how old you are, but in the days of the NFL local blackout rules (which I recall quite well), teams were blacked out in the local TV market even if the game sold-out. I grew up in the New York TV market (like Christie did) and we never saw the Giants or Jets. Our local NFC game was almost always the Dallas Cowboys. They were very popular back then and scored the best in the national ratings.BDKJMU wrote:What connection does Christie have to the Dallas area or even the state of TX? He's not from there. Didn't go to school there. Did he ever live/work there?
A little confession. I grew up seeing so many Cowboys games that I was actually a Cowboys fan when I was young. It wasn't until 1973, when I was 11, that I started seeing Giants' games regularly, and they became my team. But I have a lot of friends who are still Dallas Cowboys fans owing to the pre-1973 blackout rules. My brother, who is two years older than me, still roots for the Cowboys.
I remember that my dad used to drive to a friend's house in southern NJ, the Eagles' home market, so he could watch the Giants play on Sunday. In 1973, the rules changed, and a local game could be shown in the local market, so long as the game was a sell-out 72 hours prior to the game.
The reason the Cowboys are so popular still has to do with the pre-1973 rules, because they were the team of choice in many markets under the pre-1973 blackout rules.
Different era. Today, TV money is king, and if we have to inconvenience 80,000 attending fans so we can televise a game at a better time for higher ratings ... so be it.BDKJMU wrote:Sounds like a bunch of retards were running the NFL back in those days. Most absurd rules I've ever heard. Makes absolutely no sense..JoltinJoe wrote:
I don't know how old you are, but in the days of the NFL local blackout rules (which I recall quite well), teams were blacked out in the local TV market even if the game sold-out. I grew up in the New York TV market (like Christie did) and we never saw the Giants or Jets. Our local NFC game was almost always the Dallas Cowboys. They were very popular back then and scored the best in the national ratings.
A little confession. I grew up seeing so many Cowboys games that I was actually a Cowboys fan when I was young. It wasn't until 1973, when I was 11, that I started seeing Giants' games regularly, and they became my team. But I have a lot of friends who are still Dallas Cowboys fans owing to the pre-1973 blackout rules. My brother, who is two years older than me, still roots for the Cowboys.
I remember that my dad used to drive to a friend's house in southern NJ, the Eagles' home market, so he could watch the Giants play on Sunday. In 1973, the rules changed, and a local game could be shown in the local market, so long as the game was a sell-out 72 hours prior to the game.
The reason the Cowboys are so popular still has to do with the pre-1973 rules, because they were the team of choice in many markets under the pre-1973 blackout rules.

42 years is long enough for stupid fucks to jump off the bandwagon...JoltinJoe wrote:Different era. Today, TV money is king, and if we have to inconvenience 80,000 attending fans so we can televise a game at a better time for higher ratings ... so be it.BDKJMU wrote:
Sounds like a bunch of retards were running the NFL back in those days. Most absurd rules I've ever heard. Makes absolutely no sense..
But back then, the thought was that if people could see the game on TV for free, they wouldn't pay to attend the game. Gate revenue was the lifeblood of the league.
Even so, the post-1973 rule requiring a home sellout 72 hours in advance of game time, only went away a couple of years ago. Over time, it became largely irrelevant, since most team sold out (and they also had the option to waive the rule).
But if you have ever wondered why some NFL teams have fans all over the country, it is really owing to the NFL pre-1973 blackout rule. kalm is right: the (LA) Rams were also among the teams that we saw frequently.
The teams which we saw all the time: Oakland Raiders, Minnesota Vikings, LA Rams, Dallas Cowboys (with the Cowboys probably being the most frequently seen team in my area). Given boys often pick up their fathers' teams, I'd bet they are still among the four most popular teams in the NFL.

Yeah because you would have known back then how to run it.BDKJMU wrote:42 years is long enough for stupid fucks to jump off the bandwagon...JoltinJoe wrote:
Different era. Today, TV money is king, and if we have to inconvenience 80,000 attending fans so we can televise a game at a better time for higher ratings ... so be it.
But back then, the thought was that if people could see the game on TV for free, they wouldn't pay to attend the game. Gate revenue was the lifeblood of the league.
Even so, the post-1973 rule requiring a home sellout 72 hours in advance of game time, only went away a couple of years ago. Over time, it became largely irrelevant, since most team sold out (and they also had the option to waive the rule).
But if you have ever wondered why some NFL teams have fans all over the country, it is really owing to the NFL pre-1973 blackout rule. kalm is right: the (LA) Rams were also among the teams that we saw frequently.
The teams which we saw all the time: Oakland Raiders, Minnesota Vikings, LA Rams, Dallas Cowboys (with the Cowboys probably being the most frequently seen team in my area). Given boys often pick up their fathers' teams, I'd bet they are still among the four most popular teams in the NFL.

I agree with Brokebackjon about 1% of the time, but this here is funny! Reminds me of the old Bud Light drag queen commercial.dbackjon wrote:

Fuck retirement! They're gonna die soon anyway, amirite?CAA Flagship wrote:Christie beats unions again.
NJ Supreme Court rules in favor of Christie and his $1.6B cut in pension funding.

There's always 401(k)s. What could possibly go wrong with those?93henfan wrote:Fuck retirement! They're gonna die soon anyway, amirite?CAA Flagship wrote:Christie beats unions again.
NJ Supreme Court rules in favor of Christie and his $1.6B cut in pension funding.

CAA Flagship wrote:Christie beats unions again.
NJ Supreme Court rules in favor of Christie and his $1.6B cut in pension funding.

You know a thread has jumped the shark when poundpud posts on it.houndawg wrote:CAA Flagship wrote:Christie beats unions again.
NJ Supreme Court rules in favor of Christie and his $1.6B cut in pension funding.
Easy when the lawmakers have their own separate pension system. The one in Illinois is funded to 300% right now. The State employees pension is, like SS, filled with IOUs from the guvmint.When will patriotic citizens start kneecapping these conk scumsuckers in the street? There should be a bounty on them, kill a politician and $1,000 gets put into the pension fund. It would be such a wonderful world.


FIFY. Illinois is a prime example of what happens under decades of mostly democrat rule..houndawg wrote:CAA Flagship wrote:Christie beats unions again.
NJ Supreme Court rules in favor of Christie and his $1.6B cut in pension funding.
Easy when the lawmakers have their own separate pension system. The one in Illinois is funded to 300% right now. The State employees pension is, like SS, filled with IOUs from the guvmint.When will patriotic citizens start kneecapping these DONK scumsuckers in the street? There should be a bounty on them, kill a politician and $1,000 gets put into the pension fund. It would be such a wonderful world.
BDKJMU wrote:FIFY. Illinois is a prime example of what happens under decades of mostly democrat rule..houndawg wrote:
Easy when the lawmakers have their own separate pension system. The one in Illinois is funded to 300% right now. The State employees pension is, like SS, filled with IOUs from the guvmint.When will patriotic citizens start kneecapping these DONK scumsuckers in the street? There should be a bounty on them, kill a politician and $1,000 gets put into the pension fund. It would be such a wonderful world.

Yeah but the real damage gets done by the conks.BDKJMU wrote:FIFY. Illinois is a prime example of what happens under decades of mostly democrat rule..houndawg wrote:
Easy when the lawmakers have their own separate pension system. The one in Illinois is funded to 300% right now. The State employees pension is, like SS, filled with IOUs from the guvmint.When will patriotic citizens start kneecapping these DONK scumsuckers in the street? There should be a bounty on them, kill a politician and $1,000 gets put into the pension fund. It would be such a wonderful world.

Meh, video was posted in 2012. I'm sure Illinois has gotten everything under contro.....Baldy wrote:BDKJMU wrote:
FIFY. Illinois is a prime example of what happens under decades of mostly democrat rule..@ Illinois.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tczu_dvVuuk[/youtube]


houndawg wrote:Yeah but the real damage gets done by the conks.BDKJMU wrote:
FIFY. Illinois is a prime example of what happens under decades of mostly democrat rule..
BDKJMU wrote:42 years is long enough for stupid fucks to jump off the bandwagon...JoltinJoe wrote:
Different era. Today, TV money is king, and if we have to inconvenience 80,000 attending fans so we can televise a game at a better time for higher ratings ... so be it.
But back then, the thought was that if people could see the game on TV for free, they wouldn't pay to attend the game. Gate revenue was the lifeblood of the league.
Even so, the post-1973 rule requiring a home sellout 72 hours in advance of game time, only went away a couple of years ago. Over time, it became largely irrelevant, since most team sold out (and they also had the option to waive the rule).
But if you have ever wondered why some NFL teams have fans all over the country, it is really owing to the NFL pre-1973 blackout rule. kalm is right: the (LA) Rams were also among the teams that we saw frequently.
The teams which we saw all the time: Oakland Raiders, Minnesota Vikings, LA Rams, Dallas Cowboys (with the Cowboys probably being the most frequently seen team in my area). Given boys often pick up their fathers' teams, I'd bet they are still among the four most popular teams in the NFL.

Hey dumbass, I posted that over 5 months ago. My you are slow..Ibanez wrote:BDKJMU wrote:
42 years is long enough for stupid **** to jump off the bandwagon...![]()
My Dad and father in law (born in 1950, 1954 respectively) are Cowboys fans for this reason. It's not a bandwagon if that's what you grew up watching. God, sometimes you truly are a dumb ****. You don't understand the concept of a bandwagon, do you ?
Slow? Why? Because I didn't read that 5 months ago? Because I don't read EVERY post you have? You really are a dumb shit. Don't flatter yourself, buttercup.BDKJMU wrote:Hey dumbass, I posted that over 5 months ago. My you are slow..Ibanez wrote:![]()
My Dad and father in law (born in 1950, 1954 respectively) are Cowboys fans for this reason. It's not a bandwagon if that's what you grew up watching. God, sometimes you truly are a dumb ****. You don't understand the concept of a bandwagon, do you ?

Over 30k posts looks like you practically live on here. So you didn't read it 5 months ago but you went back to look at it now and bothered to respond..Ibanez wrote:Slow? Why? Because I didn't read that 5 months ago? Because I don't read EVERY post you have? You really are a dumb ****. Don't flatter yourself, buttercup.BDKJMU wrote:
Hey dumbass, I posted that over 5 months ago. My you are slow..
Post count means jack shit. Piss poor attempt at deflecting.BDKJMU wrote:Over 30k posts looks like you practically live on here. So you didn't read it 5 months ago but you went back to look at it now and bothered to respond..Ibanez wrote: Slow? Why? Because I didn't read that 5 months ago? Because I don't read EVERY post you have? You really are a dumb ****. Don't flatter yourself, buttercup.And talk about the pot calling the kettle black...
