• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lancerman

  1. Jamie's speech to Brienne in the bath.
  2. My problem with this is that when we first see Mance he's described as being fairly unremarkable, not too tall, not buff or stoic. Just sort of very average an unassuming. Rhaegar is described as tall and pretty much the most ideal male in the 7 kingdoms.
  3. The problem with every Rheagar and Lyanna thread is that we simply don't know enough about their mutual interactions to make any real observations or deductions.
  4. The problem is that it's heavily implied that Visery's treatment of Dany was informed largely by resentment he had after being cast out of his homeland, denied his birthright, mocked as a beggar, scavenging to provide for himself and Dany, etc. Over many years that sacrifice broke him. This is a scenario where Visery's has none of that baggage and was raised by a mother who loved him and grew up as one of the most important social figures in Westeros. I mean even in the books Dany thinks about how Visery's was a great brother most of her life and that he took care of her. So it shouldn't be treated as a given that he's abusive. You are completely altering his formative years and changing a lot of the circumstances that made him that cold hearted and bitter. And even if you just assume Visery's ends up a horrible husband, which I would disagree with, he's still a son of the royal family and a valuable tool for a political alliance. Aside from that. The smartest thing for the Targaryen dynasty at that point would be to marry Dany off to Robb Stark. They don't have an especially close relationship and politically they are incredibly valuable being the House furthest North with the largest landmass. Just that alone means between Rheagar and Dany you have the two furthest Houses in the most strategic locations in an alliance with you. That's big for the Targs having marriages with the sister of Dorne's two princes and the Warden of the North. Visery's has two key options. He marries Arianne and now Dorne is forever tied to House Targaryen or he marry's Margeary and gets the biggest army. I probably go with Marg. Dorne should be happy that the new crown prince is half Dornish. If Cersie isn't married by this point I definitely consider that as well.
  5. -he didn't expect Robert to die and leave a power vacuum. -he didn't expect Ned to claim Joffrey to be a bastard and now have a question over the line of succession and have the head of the house he was in conflict with to have treason charges levied against him. -he didn't expect Robb to be cunning enough to capture Jamie -Since he didn't expect accusations to be hurled at Joffrey he had no reason to believe that Stannis was in Dragonstone biding his time to make a play for the throne. -He didn't expect Joffrey to execute Ned with every single advisor telling him not to. -Nobody expected Renly would make a play for the throne until Renly revealed his plan to Ned Stark. -Nobody expected Renly to die later on and for Stannis to unify the Stormlands. Before that Stannis was a bit of an empty threat. The reality was Tywin was placed in a conflict he didn't anticipate for BEFORE all that happened, and then circumstances changed quickly and radically on him and he was stuck playing the hand he was dealt. Tywin was constantly forced to adapt and change his play. He got lucky, but he needed to be lucky to get out of that situation. His lone advantage was holding Sansa and Arya hostage (which was only partially true) and that was a weaker hand than the Stark's having Jamie. The only figures that gave Tywin legitimacy were making isolated in King's Landing making a mess of the situation.
  6. I miss the old days of it being called the juice, BUT SOMEBODY had to go and ruin that word for football.
  7. The only two that I think have a chance of being a success are Robert's Rebellion or the Conquest. Mainly because both are multilayered epics in scale. The Rebellion has the advantage of having strong ties to the original series and built care for the characters. Ned, Robert, Tywin, Jamie, etc. And while the major points will be hit on in the current show, there are plenty of interesting gaps to fill in. You can probably keep this going up to the Greyjoy Rebellion. The conquest resets the table a bit, but it's pretty standard. Older Westeros being taken over by Dragonlords. The forging of the Iron Throne. Could work but it's mostly going to be dragons dominating everyone. It isn't really even a contest until Dorne, which is whatever.
  8. It's not a loophole. It's using a rule to cause confusion. A loophole is finding a legal maneuver to do something that is otherwise prohibited. There is a difference. A loophole is something like I want to do X but rule #24 says I can't do X. But I can legally do A, F and Y. And doing that effectively allows me to perform X without being penalized for it. There was never an intention in the rule book to prevent what the Patriots did. The Patriots just took advantage of the mechanics of a rule to apply it in an outside the box way to give a team a look they weren't prepared for. There was a never priority of the NFL to not have that happen. The greater irony of the whole thing is that because of how much attention it got, it likely wouldn't work again for several years. The Patriots weren't even comfortable doing it in the first half because they figured it would be useless if the Ravens had the chance to talk about. So it was almost redundant changing the rule.
  9. They could very easily get a first round pick if they wanted to between Garrapolo and Butler. So the idea that they couldn't draft him is a bit of moot point. If they wanted him bad enough they could easily get him. Blount was caught in the passenger seat of a car smoking weed. That's about as harmless as it gets. It was decriminalized in the state he plays for back when it happened and now in that same state. If you want to go crazy on that, knock yourself out. Thompkins is a tricky case. He definitely had issues. But they were generally confined to way back when he was in high school and most of them when he was a minor. About 4 or 5 years before the Patriots picked him up. And he basically was one of those cases where he found god or something at jr college and was something of a model citizen ever since, who had coaches going out of their to vouch for his character. So by the time he got to the Patriots he was considered a success story of someone who turned his life around. Michael Floyd's probably your best example. He has an alcohol problem. He's also never had any violent crime issues and is a far cry away from being caught on camera smashing his fist into a women's face. Mixon is going to be a serious public relations nightmare with any team that picks him up. The second he's drafted that video is going to be all over the place and talk shows are going to start relitigating it. It'll be the same thing as Gregg Hardy and Ray Rice.
  10. It was announced in the field of play too. The Ravens staff either knew or wasn't paying attention. And all they had to do to adjust was not cover the guy and only cover the eligible receivers. The problem was them not correctly identifying that they shouldn't cover a guy who can't catch the ball. There is no reason for the Ravens to not fall for that other than they just weren't really all that smart. It's not even really loophole. It's just the Patriots adding an unnecessary step in the process that's designed to confuse a team. A loophole implies that it was a way to legally circumvent a rule. They didn't do that. They used the rule in a redundant way to cause confusion. Once you identify it, it should never be an issue again. Hell a smart coach and player should be able to put two and two together and realize they shouldn't be covering someone who is inelgible. 90% of the problem was the Ravens failing to adjust. It's funny because the Patriots waited until the second half because they were under the impression that the trick wouldn't work after awhile. Then Ravens kept falling for it and Harbaugh freaked out and had to waste a timeout.
  11. The one morally questionable character was a Hernandez whose issues in college didn't include getting caught on camera smashing a women in the face. And the minute he was implicated in something he was immediately released without question. A lot of franchises wouldn't do that. Especially going into a season where they let go of their number 1 receiver and had their number 1 TE injured to start the year. Also Kraft has always taken a hardline stance against violence against women. Someone just sounds salty.
  12. No it really shouldn't have. Changing the rule was rewarding stupidity. I knew people who were in the stadium that day. I had family who were at the stadium that day. It was announced to the entire stadium that those players were inelgible. The fact that the Raven's staff kept players covering ineligible receivers is on them. Anybody with half a brain should have figured that out. Ironically it's play you could probably only run once a year.
  13. Oakland caused this if we are being fair. They thought they had leverage and tried to lowball Davis. The opportunity for Vegas presented itself after years and after the Raiders did the league a solid by bowing out of the 3 way race to LA. This was his reward. Then Oakland came in at the last hour with a very vague plan like a day before the vote. They knew damn well the vote was a formality at that point and it was too little to late. It's like that cliche of rushing to a wedding to change the brides mind right before she says I do. It was unrealistic and too wishy washy. That said, it's probably best for all involved that the Raiders find somewhere else to play. Cut a deal with UNLV or something. But get out of Oakland. You are good team, you don't need to be a lame duck somewhere, it's toxic at this critical juncture in the team's development.
  14. Besides the point. And singling out the tuck rule, as if the pattern isn't the more relevant point, is also missing the mark, for the record nobody gave a shit about the tuck rule in the 2001 season when the Patriots were on the wrong end of it in the Jets game. If most fan bases could cite multiple explicit rule changes because their team was utilizing it, they would be screaming bloody murder. If this happened in another sport and rules were being constantly changed in response to what one team was having success with, it would put into question the legitimacy of the league. The fact that they still win is beside the point. It shouldn't happen to any team.
  15. 2003 Patriots kick the hell out of the Colts. Colts lobby to have defensive contact rules tightened. Pretty much changed the QB game for this generation of QB from 2004 on. 2014 Patriots exploit and eligible receiver designation rule in a playoff game against the Ravens. Harbaugh lobby's to have rule changed. It is. 2016 after the Seahawks had been doing it for years, the Patriots start utilizing a leaper and it gets noticed in high profile games. Rule changed next season. Patriots win Super Bowl in overtime. Now the rules committee is talking about toying with the overtime rule. Tuck rule eventually got repealled. You have journalists saying owners won't change rules if the Patriots propose it because they are afraid it is an advantage for them. But the Patriots are the one's who have an issue with the rules.
  16. Jon Connington and Young Griff- meh. It would take alot of work for an unknown payoff. It would really come off as a "who the hell are these people". Also the fact that they aligned Dorne with Dany almost immediatly circumvents his storyline in my opinion. Lady Stoneheart- they could have, but it would have been rather pointless to have done it without adding a ton of filler to justify bringing a main character back. I said in another thread, they could do the whole current LSH storyline in the first two episodes of next season and we wouldn't miss anything. Arianne and Quentyn- You could just do the same Dorne plot with Arianne. Quentin is unnecessary. The whole plot feels like a complication to align Dorne with Dany. Too much of it ties to Jon Con and Griff. You have to bypass the whole marriage thing and just have Doran's speech to mean an alliance to Dany with no strings attached. But that's about it. Victarion and Aeron- With some reworking maybe. But we essentially have the same result. Garlan and Willas- Willas hasn't even been seen yet. Only mentioned. Garlan would have been killed at the Sept in this seasons finale. So who cares?
  17. Tywin has a sister who point blank said Jamie isn't his son, whether that was figurative or not. He knew Aery's had a thing for his wife. He knew Aery's wife kicked Joanna out of court. Aery's made a comment about nursing children ruining Joanna's breasts, it was enough of a slight to outrage Tywin to leave the court. It's not like there is nothing there. He knows there are rumors of his children practicing incest (he likely knows their were similar issues at Casterly Rock). He knows that his grandson was mad and drew comparisons from several characters to the Mad King, a person Tywin is all to familiar with. There Maybe you could argue Tywin doesn't know for sure, but it's very possible the seed of that is in his mind. Maybe it's not either. But it isn't entirely baseless to say their are enough bread crumbs for him to see the possibility. As far as everything else. Tywin is so against Tyrion being his heir and ruining his legacy that he wants his firstborn son who is regarded as a kingslayer to forsake one of the most honorable life vows in the seven kingdom. Tywin in that same situation outright told Tyrion he would never allow him to inherit Casterly Rock. He has a serious disdain for Tyrion. He has a serious image issue with the projection of power on his house. And again Tywin would never be able to 100% prove Jamie isn't his son, just like he wouldn't be able to prove Tyrion is. So even if he suspects something, Jamie is still far and away the better option in his eyes. And to the whole world Jamie will never be regarded as anything other than Tywin's son.
  18. -He's his firstborn son. -He's one of, if not the, finest knights of his generation. -He's one of the most handsome men in the kingdom and projects a strong image for House Lannister. -He didn't outwardly project too many vices, maybe the biggest was vanity and rashness. -His only other option as an heir was a disliked, deformed, imp, that spent his days drinking and whoring around across the kingdom. Because of all that, he's willing to overlook the faults he KNOWS Jamie to have, because he has all the aspects people will see first. Later on he probably hopes that Jamie is teachable and he can get him in line and to be more cunning. Tyrion on the other hand has the mind and substance, but he'll never have the things that people see when they look at Jamie.
  19. It's a world where you can't definitively prove parentage. So even if Tywin suspects it, it's not like he can just claim it. He'd be claiming that: 1. He got cuckolded. Which makes him look bad, makes his wife look bad, makes his house look bad, makes two kids that he can't prove aren't his either way possible abominations, and forces him to name the most undesirable child of his wife to true heir. 2. Now he's calling his king an adulterer and the father of two bastards, which he again can't prove definitively. And it's something Aerys could find as treasonous. And similarly to your explanation that there is no proof in the books that Tywin would be okay with it, there's no proof he wouldn't. At best Tywin's entire basis for thinking that, if he does at all, is almost entirely based in suspicion and not actual confirmation of fact. So if he turned out to be wrong, then he's bypassing his son who is one of the best knights of his generation and one of the most desirable men in Westeros for an imp who would make his house a laughing stock. Even if he kinda thinks it, going with Jamie is still the overall smarter thing for his house in the future. Even if Tywin believed in his heart of hearts that Jamie was 100% not his son, what do you think his actual options are? Because nobody else would know but him, he has no proof, and it puts Tyrion as his sole heir. Tywin is not a classicist to the extent of Stannis. He is a man whose sole objective is the strength of his house. I mean come on, Tywin's a pretty smart man, who had to know what happened with Jamie and Cersie when they were kids, he heard the rumors, he knows about Robert's bastards, even if he denies it he can put two and two together. He just turns a blind eye because Joffrey and Tommen as King is better for House Lannister. And if Tywin were that much of a classicist, well Jamie's a Kingsguard, he wouldn't exactly be putting all his eggs into getting his son out of a life vow for one of the most high profile and honorable positions in the kingdom.
  20. It's less about how much in story time passed and that you in a television format you are telling it season by season at a very defined pace for the original airing. Even if we say one second has passed for the characters, one year has passed for the audience, the actors, the crew, etc. So when you introduce a character like LSH it's a major development for the audience, and when you have to sit on that devopment for two years, it impacts how the audience digests it. And that impacts how the audience perceives the plot point. Example, to most fans they had to wait a year with Jon Snow dead to see what happened to him. In series, he was probably only dead a few hours at most and two episodes apart. If you switched the episodes around so that season 5 had him killed off in episode 8, Davos finds him in 9, and he's ressurected in 10, all of a sudden he was brought back right away and it lessens the impact. But that's not how it happened. We waited a full off season to see him come back and it impacts how we perceive what happened. And that's the problem you run into LSH. You bring her in, and then have nothing do with her sans maybe 1 scene in season 5 and 6.
  21. I doubt they are too. I'm just saying, based off the material we have, there is nothing that she did that can't be accomplished in the first two episodes of next season if they wanted to use her. So the idea that they needed to introduce her before or should have introduced her 2 seasons ago and then made up filler plots to keep her active just isn't a compelling argument to me. The question is less why wasn't she introduced yet, and more "why wasn't she introduced at all". Assuming they don't use her. And truthfully if they were going to introduce her they would try to keep it a secret anyways. For that final question, it depends on how important she is in the novel going forward. If Brienne has a change of heart and slays her to save Jamie in the very next scene, then it's like okay probably a poignant character moment, but not the most effective use of plot time. If she plays heavily into the endgame, then we might question it more and argue that it was a mistake to not include her. But either way at this point there simply is a lack of information and source material to have that discussion. With other additions or subtractions to the series there is generally enough information to see what the thought process was for doing one thing over another. Whether you agree with it or not, you can see the "why". There isn't enough to create a "why" for LSH.
  22. It doesn't ultimately matter. For all intents and purposes, Jamie and Cersie are his children. They are also the blood of his wife who are related to him. In Tywin's mind, it's probably better for the Lannister name if the handsome brave knight were to inherit his family lineage than sticking the family's future and Tywin's legacy under a deformed imp. He simply just might not care as long as his family legacy is protected.
  23. In my mind it's a double meaning. Realistically Gemma would have no idea whether Jamie and Cersie were not Tywin's biological kids. She probably meant it strictly to mean that Tyrion has Tywin's mind and temperament, while Jamie is his own person. But it's also probably a hint that we may or may not find out that Jamie and Cersie are actually not his biological children. Cersie and Joffrey were both mad like Aerys. Jamie seems to be more of a fun loving free spirit. The ultimate irony of the Lannister family would be if the two kids who were outwardly perfect but had severe personality issues were not Tywins kids. And the intelligent son he rejected who was disfigured ended up being his only true son.
  24. It's the most boring option, but a Robert's Rebellion makes the most sense for this sort of a project. It is a well layered story in and of itself. AND it features enough ties to the original series to give it a hook for most of the current audience. A series where a young Ned Stark and Robert Baratheon team up to defeat the Mad King. Where Lyanna is kidnapped. Where Jamie becomes a KG. Where Tywin takes over his father's seat and watches his relationship with Aerys detoriate. Where Cat has her bethrothed taken from her and is forced to settle for Ned. Where Rheagar accidentally starts a war that will destroy his house. You could very easily get a few seasons out of that.
  25. Because you can trace the logic behind what they did and didn't add. With Jamie in Dorne it was because he had nothing else to do and they used him to help streamline the Dorne plot into something that is simpler into getting the Dornish to declare war on the Lannisters and join Dany. With Brienne in Winterfell it was because she had nothing else to do and this was a simple way to get her close to a major plot without impacting it too much and giving her some character moments. With Ros she was used to give other major characters that would be important later on some character scenes that weren't present in the book. With LSH you are advocating for two years of posturing because you want a character to exist at a certain time when she has done nothing notable so far. Like I said, it makes no difference plotwise if you waited until the start of next season to do both major LSH scenes and it changes virtually nothing. The reality is, with LSH she is a major resurrection and more importantly she simply hasn't done enough that it mandated bringing her back at any point so far. And we don't even know what she is doing in the books so far. And she isn't minor enough that the show can get away with showing her and then only giving her one scene over two years. So the only rational takeaway I am getting from this is for some reason you wanted LSH to appear chronologically when she appears in the books and then for the writers to just write filler around it for two years.