This Week in Milford

November 8, 2016

Violent Retribution: The Milford Way Of Resolving Differences

Filed under: actual action, football, lessons learned, Milford Idiots — timbuys @ 8:00 am

110816

So, I guess the refs don’t call taunting in the Valley Conference. Nevertheless, I suppose it’s good to see that whenever a girl is threatened, big strong men will come and save her. Wait, that’s a terrible lesson to learn. I’m not sure that it’s worse than giving your daughter a non-certified pre-owned Jeep Compass to drive but…

Is panel three a mid-week cliffhanger? As goes Milford, so goes the nation and all of that? Tune in tomorrow to find out!

 

Advertisements

13 Comments »

  1. Well, this won’t escalate…

    I’m not being sarcastic, I’m pretty sure this won’t escalate even though it definitely would in real life. I’m not sure the officials are at this game.

    Comment by billytheskink — November 8, 2016 @ 8:39 am

  2. GT: I’m seriously wondering if Rubin has the slightest fucking idea about the concept of American Football, and how it’s supposed to be played? And are Milford players ever called for penalties? I mean like EVER? I do like how last week set it up that Heather was going to be some anonymous “one of the guys” with no special treatment to the point where they even changed her name and this week it’s like a bunch of worker bees protecting their queen…

    Let’s forget this strip and read some real-life stories that don’t suck:
    http://www.mydaytondailynews.com/news/sports/two-girls-playing-football-for-beavercreek/nsqfQ/
    http://www.foxcarolina.com/story/29964790/first-female-to-ever-play-for-eastside-highs-football-teams-starts-third-season
    http://www.newsday.com/sports/high-school/football/3-girls-competing-with-boys-on-li-high-school-football-teams-1.12494017




    http://www.recordnet.com/sports/20161012/we-can-do-this-too-five-area-girls-take-on-varsity-football
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/avon-view-high-school-football-player-allison-power-1.3833181
    http://wreg.com/2016/10/10/laurel-mississippi-girl-becomes-first-female-to-score-touchdown-in-state/
    http://abc7.com/sports/15-year-old-girl-goes-from-cheerleader-to-football-player/1572827/

    Comment by Hitorque — November 8, 2016 @ 8:41 am

  3. http://www.foxcarolina.com/story/29964790/first-female-to-ever-play-for-eastside-highs-football-teams-starts-third-season

    Was there ever any reason give as to why “H.E.” didn’t start playing earlier, given that girls playing football isn’t even a big deal anymore?

    Comment by Hitorque — November 8, 2016 @ 8:48 am

  4. Hey, what happened to Marty Moon’s smokin’ hot take on The Girl Tee? Was that just a cruel feint by Rubin?

    Comment by John S. Walters — November 8, 2016 @ 8:55 am

  5. Great point, John S. Walters! We were led to believe there was “unwanted attention”, but we saw nothing but Marty in his “studio” reading the paper. C’mon Rubin, we need hot takes! We need unhinged Moon’s hot takes!

    Comment by nedryerson — November 8, 2016 @ 9:10 am

  6. You can’t knock the crap out of anyone in uniform? I thought that was the idea and appeal of football? It used to be. Jack Tatum is rolling over in his grave. If your alive Jack, I apologize.

    Comment by Jive Turkey — November 8, 2016 @ 9:12 am

  7. JT, speaking of Jacks: NT’s awkwardly splayed tackler is wearing #58, famously worn by someone who once suggested that quarterbacks should wear dresses. NT #58 appears to be grabbing his crotch in reply, whereupon The Secret Pelwecki has begun to flip the bird in P2.

    Comment by teenchy — November 8, 2016 @ 9:31 am

  8. Oh, Brother, now we have 2/3 of the Hanson Brothers, when they’re in the off-season from the Charlestown Chiefs, taking matters into their own hands as a desperate attempt to spice up the frail plot. Steve Hanson must have been academically ineligible or he’d be in on the beatdown. Not that that would stop him, his being a goon, but Gil and Kaz were there to keep a hooligan in street clothes from joining in the fun. Awayyyyyyyy we go.

    Comment by T. Drew Hardin — November 8, 2016 @ 11:14 am

  9. What is this Milford obsession with vigilantism/getting even, where everyone is their own judge and jury? We see it every football season from coaches and/or players, Big Barda *broke* a dude’s jaw last year (and didn’t even sit out a game) and even this past baseball season was nothing but a five-month vigilante campaign against Barry Bader (granted he brought some of it on himself, but still)… Does legally blocking a linebacker on his duff really ‘send a message’? Do these two mooks think that linebacker isn’t going to hit Heather (or anyone else, for that matter) for the rest of the game? Shouldn’t Heather’s response (in true Milfordian Tradition) be “Thanks, but I can handle myself out there — You just worry about your role”??

    Shit like this gets old…

    Comment by Hitorque — November 8, 2016 @ 11:24 am

  10. Just a note to posters: If you include more than one or two links in your post, it will likely go into moderation. If that happens, your post won’t appear right away as, while I normally have a very flexible schedule, my employer generally doesn’t have much interest in me moderating posts during the day.

    Comment by timbuys — November 8, 2016 @ 11:38 am

  11. The 3 tight end power sweep, like the Atlanta Falcons…

    Comment by George PBurdell — November 8, 2016 @ 12:37 pm

  12. T. Drew Hardin – Pelwecki’s flowing locks, Darwin’s dopey camera mugging from last season, and the general lack of thick glasses in this strip since Steve Luhm and Howard Gourwitz had me thinking of a different set of Hanson brothers

    Comment by billytheskink — November 8, 2016 @ 3:27 pm

  13. First of all, guy on left should be talking to the LB on the ground, not to his own teammate. They finish each others sentence, which looks lame and obviously pre-arranged, like its a comic strip or something. (Oh yeah it is) I would call unnneccesary roughness on # 58 for going after a defenseless player (Heather) obviously without the ball. Then the next play would be clean as we dont see the context of the play, IE who had the ball and the point-of-attack. But if the ref policed the action as he should have, then there’s no need for retribution the next play.

    Comment by robmize2013 — November 8, 2016 @ 9:19 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: