Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Open Forum => Off-Topic => Sports => Topic started by: New Raven BR on December 08, 2013, 05:39:38 PM
-
im in the spirit of football right now so while im listening to the Titans/Broncos game, I just thought i'd start a discussion on the NFL standings.
so far the picture looks like this
AFC NFC
East
Patriots 9-3 Eagles 8-5
Dolphins 6-6 Cowboys 7-5
Jets 5-7 Giants 5-7
Bills 4-9 Redskins 3-10
West
Broncos 10-2 Seahawks 11-1 (clinched wild card)
Chiefs 10-3 49ers 8-4
Chargers 5-7 Cardinals 7-5
Raiders 4-8 Rams 5-7
North
Bengals 9-4 Lions 7-6
Ravens 7-6 Bears 6-6
Steelers 5-7 Packers 6-6-1
Browns 4-8 Vikings 3-10-1
South
Colts 8-5 Saints 9-3
Titans 5-8 Panthers 9-3
Jaguars 4-9 Buccaneers 4-9
Texans 2-11 Falcons 3-10
I just wanted to talk about this. since last season I must ask the Houston and Atlanta fans; WHAT happened to the Texans and Falcons? last year they were superbowl caliber but now they're not playing their best. what happened there?
-
In the converse of Houston and Atlanta, think of last years Chiefs and Panthers, compared to this years Chiefs and Panthers.
-
The most intriguing thing about the NFL is the number of playoff teams from last year that are not in the current playoff picture this year:
2012-13 Playoff Teams:
Denver
New England
Houston
Baltimore
Indianapolis
Cincinnati
Atlanta
San Francisco
Green Bay
Washington
Seattle
Minnesota
2013-14 Playoff Picture (through Week 14):
Denver
New England
Cincinnati
Indianapolis
Kansas City
Miami
Seattle
New Orleans
Philadelphia
Detroit
San Francisco
Carolina
So there are currently 6 teams from the playoffs last year that are not in the playoff standings, and only 2 of the other 6 (Green Bay Packers and the Baltimore RavenRefs*) have a chance of making it.
*Yeah, I'm a little bitter. To have one of the most exciting endings to a football game effectively decided by a bogus pass interference call was just sad, among several other blatant errors brought to us Viking fans by the officiating crew yesterday. Had we won that game, we would still not have been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. Not that we could expect the Lions, Bears and soon-to-have-Rodgers-back Packers to lose out to let us win the division, but the way every team in the NFC North has been playing of late, it wasn't that far-fetched...
-
Justin, im not JUST a titans fan. im also a Ravens fan (does make sense how I root for my namesake team) just thought you should know. i'd be complaining about the refs as well cause I cant stand them myself, I do know how you feel when it comes to referees screwing a team over and cause them to lose the titans have gotten that before as well as the ravens. but just out of curiousity, how do you explain the other 9 losses the Vikings have had within the regular season?
-
The most intriguing thing about the NFL is the number of playoff teams from last year that are not in the current playoff picture this year:
2012-13 Playoff Teams:
Denver
New England
Houston
Baltimore
Indianapolis
Cincinnati
Atlanta
San Francisco
Green Bay
Washington
Seattle
Minnesota
2013-14 Playoff Picture (through Week 14):
Denver
New England
Cincinnati
Indianapolis
Kansas City
Miami
Seattle
New Orleans
Philadelphia
Detroit
San Francisco
Carolina
So there are currently 6 teams from the playoffs last year that are not in the playoff standings, and only 2 of the other 6 (Green Bay Packers and the Baltimore RavenRefs*) have a chance of making it.
*Yeah, I'm a little bitter. To have one of the most exciting endings to a football game effectively decided by a bogus pass interference call was just sad, among several other blatant errors brought to us Viking fans by the officiating crew yesterday. Had we won that game, we would still not have been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. Not that we could expect the Lions, Bears and soon-to-have-Rodgers-back Packers to lose out to let us win the division, but the way every team in the NFC North has been playing of late, it wasn't that far-fetched...
Hey, the Ravens are currently in the number 6 spot because they have the head to head tie-breaker over the dolphins.
(Also as a side note, I really dislike it when people complain about games being decided by refs. Yes the officiating went against the Vikings, but the Vikings had enough chances to win that game for themselves and they didn't. Every team will have games where the calls go against them and its their job to overcome that.)
-
Hey, the Ravens are currently in the number 6 spot because they have the head to head tie-breaker over the dolphins.
(Also as a side note, I really dislike it when people complain about games being decided by refs. Yes the officiating went against the Vikings, but the Vikings had enough chances to win that game for themselves and they didn't. Every team will have games where the calls go against them and its their job to overcome that.)
I thought I had heard yesterday that the Ravens needed the Dolphins to lose to stay in the playoff picture because the Dolphins had the tiebreaker. Perhaps I was wrong.
As for people complaining about bad calls, that's how we cope with rooting for losing teams. ;) Obviously a good team would have won that game in spite of the bad calls. But when the deck is already stacked against your team (on the road, bad weather for a team that is accustomed to the comforts of an indoor stadium, your best player gets injured early in the second quarter, etc.) and you still play well enough to win, it makes those bad calls seem much worse. It's hard enough to win an NFL game given all of those conditions, but it's even harder when the refs seemed determined to continually give the advantage to the home team.
-
Hey, the Ravens are currently in the number 6 spot because they have the head to head tie-breaker over the dolphins.
(Also as a side note, I really dislike it when people complain about games being decided by refs. Yes the officiating went against the Vikings, but the Vikings had enough chances to win that game for themselves and they didn't. Every team will have games where the calls go against them and its their job to overcome that.)
I thought I had heard yesterday that the Ravens needed the Dolphins to lose to stay in the playoff picture because the Dolphins had the tiebreaker. Perhaps I was wrong.
As for people complaining about bad calls, that's how we cope with rooting for losing teams. ;) Obviously a good team would have won that game in spite of the bad calls. But when the deck is already stacked against your team (on the road, bad weather for a team that is accustomed to the comforts of an indoor stadium, your best player gets injured early in the second quarter, etc.) and you still play well enough to win, it makes those bad calls seem much worse. It's hard enough to win an NFL game given all of those conditions, but it's even harder when the refs seemed determined to continually give the advantage to the home team.
Both the Harbaughs are known for public riding referees and people can say what they want but it has impacted the officiating on ravens and 49ers games. The ravens get a ton of Ticky tack PI calls sense harbaugh showed up and the 49ers got a ton of crud due to their harbaugh whining about the Seahawks secondary for a year and a half. Both of them complain about there teams getting flagge for obvious blows to the heads of quarter backs and then want wimpy calls when there QB's run and knocked around a little bit. Eventually it will come around to roost I hope.
-
Hey, the Ravens are currently in the number 6 spot because they have the head to head tie-breaker over the dolphins.
(Also as a side note, I really dislike it when people complain about games being decided by refs. Yes the officiating went against the Vikings, but the Vikings had enough chances to win that game for themselves and they didn't. Every team will have games where the calls go against them and its their job to overcome that.)
I thought I had heard yesterday that the Ravens needed the Dolphins to lose to stay in the playoff picture because the Dolphins had the tiebreaker. Perhaps I was wrong.
As for people complaining about bad calls, that's how we cope with rooting for losing teams. ;) Obviously a good team would have won that game in spite of the bad calls. But when the deck is already stacked against your team (on the road, bad weather for a team that is accustomed to the comforts of an indoor stadium, your best player gets injured early in the second quarter, etc.) and you still play well enough to win, it makes those bad calls seem much worse. It's hard enough to win an NFL game given all of those conditions, but it's even harder when the refs seemed determined to continually give the advantage to the home team.
Both the Harbaughs are known for public riding referees and people can say what they want but it has impacted the officiating on ravens and 49ers games. The ravens get a ton of Ticky tack PI calls sense harbaugh showed up and the 49ers got a ton of crud due to their harbaugh whining about the Seahawks secondary for a year and a half. Both of them complain about there teams getting flagge for obvious blows to the heads of quarter backs and then want wimpy calls when there QB's run and knocked around a little bit. Eventually it will come around to roost I hope.
FWIW Jim Harbaugh is one of my least favorite coaches in the league specifically because of the whining about calls and the temper tantrums when he doesn't get his way. If a fan complains about calls costing them the game, it annoys me some, but its what I expect from fans. When coaches or players complain that a call cost them the game, it sours my opinion of them because they are professionals, part of their job is overcoming bad calls (they do happen to everyone) and winning in spite of them. (As a small side note, I actually don't have a problem with coaches and players asking for flags in game. You take what advantage you can get in a game, so if you think you can convince the refs by asking for a flag, you should probably do it.)
This is just my opinion though. I used to be a big complainer about penalties, but when I look at it objectively and realized that all teams get hit by penalties and the best teams overcome them anyway, complaining about penalties has really started to bug me.
-
I wasn't able to watch the Vikings-Ravens game yesterday so I have been wondering if the PI call in that game was as bad as the PI penalty that gave the Patriots the win?
-
I wasn't able to watch the Vikings-Ravens game yesterday so I have been wondering if the PI call in that game was as bad as the PI penalty that gave the Patriots the win?
It was just about as bad. The Ravens receiver literally tripped/slipped on what was either the snow or Greenway's foot, and Greenway got called for PI. At least in the Pats/Browns case, there was what may have been a slight push from Joe Haden in the back of the receiver, though that was still an awful call.
-
I wasn't able to watch the Vikings-Ravens game yesterday so I have been wondering if the PI call in that game was as bad as the PI penalty that gave the Patriots the win?
It was just about as bad. The Ravens receiver literally tripped/slipped on what was either the snow or Greenway's foot, and Greenway got called for PI. At least in the Pats/Browns case, there was what may have been a slight push from Joe Haden in the back of the receiver, though that was still an awful call.
Then there was also the Garhart fumble which seemed that he was obviously down before the ball came out.
-
I wasn't able to watch the Vikings-Ravens game yesterday so I have been wondering if the PI call in that game was as bad as the PI penalty that gave the Patriots the win?
It was just about as bad. The Ravens receiver literally tripped/slipped on what was either the snow or Greenway's foot, and Greenway got called for PI. At least in the Pats/Browns case, there was what may have been a slight push from Joe Haden in the back of the receiver, though that was still an awful call.
Then there was also the Garhart fumble which seemed that he was obviously down before the ball came out.
Yeah I thought for sure that Gerhart was down when I saw the replay on the jumbotron in the stadium, and my seat had terrible views of both of the jumbotrons, so I was surprised when it was upheld.
-
Without Gronk, my Patriots will have an uphill climb to the Super Bowl. We really need to spend a high draft pick on a star receiver, or pick one up via free agency. Not giving Welker and Woodhead the money they wanted really bites us now. Of course, giving that money instead to the referees has paid off handsomely so far. ::)
-
Then there was also the Garhart fumble which seemed that he was obviously down before the ball came out.
I never saw the replay (I was listening on the radio then) but it seems that everyone agreed that it was the wrong call. I can't say that that was necessarily the game-changing controversial call though, like the PI call obviously was.
or pick one up via free agency.
Hey, I think Randy Moss is still available... ;)
Of course, giving that money instead to the referees has paid off handsomely so far. ::)
LOL! I'm not sure if it was money that the referees got from Patriots, or maybe they were instructed by Goodell himself. After all, having the Patriots lose to the Browns would simply be embarrassing for the NFL. On another note, I only have been really paying attention because he is on my fantasy team, but it's kind of interesting to see Josh Gordon having an off-day...only 151 yards and a TD? He can do better than that...
-
The thred should be updated after monday's game.
-
The thred should be updated after monday's game.
That is true. It looks like the Monsters of the Midway are looking to be a formidable foe coming down the stretch...I'm rooting for them to win the NFC North. Mostly because I don't like the Lions because they're supposed to be bad and I hate that the Vikings have taken their place as the team no one respects in the NFC North, and I don't like the Packers because.
-
After all, having the Patriots lose to the Browns would simply be embarrassing for the NFL.
This simply shows how vulnerable the Patriots are. Sure Brady has a long history of fourth quarter comebacks, but to expect that to carry the Patriots to a SuperBowl is quite a stretch. We just don't have the other personnel to keep that up much longer. We need Wilfork back in the lineup to stop the run on defense, and we need a consistent runner that can hold onto the ball. Having receivers who can get open and catch balls thrown into their hands would help too. Especially since Brady doesn't seem to get the ball into their hands as much as he used to.... at least not for the first three quarters of the game. ;)
On a completely unrelated note, folks down here are convinced that Florida State and UCF could beat the Jaguars and Buccaneers handily. :o
-
It looks like the Monsters of the Midway are looking to be a formidable foe coming down the stretch...I'm rooting for them to win the NFC North. Mostly because I don't like the Lions because they're supposed to be bad and I hate that the Vikings have taken their place as the team no one respects in the NFC North, and I don't like the Packers because.
...haters gonna hate.
Just thought I would finish that last sentence for you. ;)
-
On a completely unrelated note, folks down here are convinced that Florida State and UCF could beat the Jaguars and Buccaneers handily. :o
Two of the hottest teams in the NFL right now? I dunno...Maybe I'd have agreed a month and a half ago.
and we need a consistent runner that can hold onto the ball.
We'll trade you AP for Brady. Straight up.
...haters gonna hate.
The sentence didn't need to be finished, but yeah, that works.
-
Two of the hottest teams in the NFL right now? I dunno...Maybe I'd have agreed a month and a half ago.
The hottest team in all of football is Florida State right now.
If you think that the Buccaneers or Jaguars can beat the top teams in the NFL right now, then I would most definitely disagree. Their wins have all come against teams with losing records. Jacksonville, in fact, has half of their wins against Houston. You are talking about the bottom two offenses in the entire NFL.
We'll trade you AP for Brady. Straight up.
Ummm..... no. The whole idea is to have a running game that takes the pressure off the passing game.
-
I laugh whenever people think a college team could beat any nfl team. The college team would be dominated, by any nfl team, every time.
-
I laugh whenever people think a college team could beat any nfl team. The college team would be dominated, by any nfl team, every time.
I laugh whenever anyone says something like this in response. ;) At least baseball is willing to try these types of games during Spring Training. ;D
-
I laugh whenever people think a college team could beat any nfl team. The college team would be dominated, by any nfl team, every time.
I laugh whenever anyone says something like this in response. ;) At least baseball is willing to try these types of games during Spring Training. ;D
Hence why baseball is always better than football. :)
-
We will trade you Romo and our 1st and 3rd pick for Brady.
-
We will trade you Romo and our 1st and 3rd pick for Brady.
Tony Romo is not now, nor has he ever been your problem.
-
At least baseball is willing to try these types of games during Spring Training. ;D
I hadn't heard about that, but it sounds really cool. Has a college baseball team ever beaten a pro baseball team in spring training?
-
We will trade you Romo and our 1st and 3rd pick for Brady.
Tony Romo is not now, nor has he ever been your problem.
Sure he is...did you even watch the Dallas/Denver game? If he hadn't thrown that last pick, the Cowboys probably would have won. The 550 yds and 5 TDs were basically insignificant...
-
I hadn't heard about that, but it sounds really cool. Has a college baseball team ever beaten a pro baseball team in spring training?
MLB teams have played college teams during Spring Training since the beginning of baseball. There is a webpage with the most recent results here: http://www.springtrainingconnection.com/college.html (http://www.springtrainingconnection.com/college.html). Note that these games are not common anymore due to injury concerns from millionaires. My Red Sox have a tradition of playing both Boston College and Northeastern University every year. The picture on that webpage is from the Red Sox's Spring Training field that is a smaller replica of Fenway Park, including a Green Monster to help train young outfielders to play the bounce off the wall.
The results on that page only go to 2009, when a Community College beat the Pirates. There have been a few close games since then, but realize that these are exhibition games, so take it for what its worth. This, of course, does not demonstrate how an MLB team would fare against an NCAA powerhouse baseball school like Arizona State. Similarly, to assume that a well-balanced college powerhouse football team like this year's Florida State couldn't beat a dysfunctional NFL team like the Buccaneers is presumptuous at best. ;)
This simply shows how vulnerable the Patriots are. Sure Brady has a long history of fourth quarter comebacks, but to expect that to carry the Patriots to a SuperBowl is quite a stretch. We just don't have the other personnel to keep that up much longer.
QMFTUT - Quoting myself for the unfortunate truth.... :doh:
-
Similarly, to assume that a well-balanced college powerhouse football team like this year's Florida State couldn't beat a dysfunctional NFL team like the Buccaneers is presumptuous at best. ;)
Its really not presumptuous. A college team couldn't even fill a starting line up of NFL quality players, let alone a full team. NFL players have much better training, even the rookies on an NFL team are in better shape then they were in their final year of college. NFL teams are just bigger, faster and better than all college teams. Sure individual players on the college teams would hold their own, but overall, the NFL team would dominate.
What would really kill a college team, however, is the depth. The second string of an NFL team is generally better than college teams, so the nfl team can handle the defensive substitutions while the college team is either going to have to put in players who have no business playing against NFL players, or are going to have their starters exhausted by the second half. And then there's the other big thing depth gives you, special teams. The college team would NEVER start with any sort of decent field position. Those guys covering kickoffs? Yeah they'd be starters on most college teams, they are going to beat the special teamers of a college team every time. And this goes the other way too, the NFL team is going to start with great position pretty much every kick that doesn't start with a touchback, because the players on the special teams are simply better than what a college team can put out for special teams.
For reference, when the Jaguars where 0-4, a simulation (http://predictionmachine.com/Winless-NFL-teams-vs-Alabama) was run to see what sort of shot Alabama would have against the Jaguars. The simulation came up with the Jaguars having a 91.4% win rate. Now you might think that means Alabama had a shot, but for further reference, the same simulation gave Seattle a 95% win rate over Jacksonville when the game was played in Seattle. Alabama vs Jacksonville was determined to be about the equivalent of watching the Seahawks play the Jaguars in Seattle, that is, Alabama would be wrecked.
-
Simulator.... LOL....
-
An NFL team has 53 players that are good enough to play in the NFL. How many college players end up getting drafted? Even from the best teams? Not to mention nfl players have more experience and probably practice more. Perhaps most importantly, you're selecting from a group of 18-22 year olds for college, and 22+ year olds for the nfl. The NFL has a larger talent pool to choose from.
Pitting a college team against an nfl team would end before half time, because there wouldn't be enough college players left outside of ambulances to put enough men on the field.
-
Simulator.... LOL....
That was just something extra I threw in to emphasize the point. I already gave you the reasons a college team would be dominated.
-
I happen to disagree with both assertions from your post and Rawr's. I believe that a well-coached, well-prepared team that matches the size and speed of an NFL team could beat an NFL team (albeit a weak NFL team with a rookie QB fresh out of college - and he wasn't that dominant in college). It's not like Florida State and Alabama have cream puffs on their bench. They have the next generation of NFL players who are waiting for the Seniors to graduate. Some, like Jameis Winston, are already ready to go as Freshman. Don't be fooled into thinking that the rosters of powerhouse schools are filled with 18-year-olds. Many of the players have had redshirt years, and transferred from Junior Colleges. They are mid-20's and have the same stamina as mid-30's NFL players. The weight room of Florida State is no different than the weight room of the Buccaneers. They both have their $$millions.
Regardless, I still believe in the "Any given Sunday" philosophy. Call me a dreamer. ;D
-
We will trade you Romo and our 1st and 3rd pick for Brady.
Tony Romo is not now, nor has he ever been your problem.
Sure he is...did you even watch the Dallas/Denver game? If he hadn't thrown that last pick, the Cowboys probably would have won. The 550 yds and 5 TDs were basically insignificant...
This is hilarious to me after today (for the record, I think Romo is very good, and he does not deserve most of the blame for the loss, he definitely deserves some, but not as much as the coaching staff for not just running the ball).
-
An NFL team has 53 players that are good enough to play in the NFL. How many college players end up getting drafted?
This is the best argument for this side in my opinion. It just makes sense in theory.
2009, when a Community College beat the Pirates.
This is the best argument for this side in my opinion. Regardless of theory, this actually happened.
This makes me REALLY want to see something in the future where the college champion plays the worst ranked NFL team in an exhibition every year. And for that matter we should do the same thing with NCAA basketball and the NBA.
-
An NFL team has 53 players that are good enough to play in the NFL. How many college players end up getting drafted?
This is the best argument for this side in my opinion. It just makes sense in theory.
2009, when a Community College beat the Pirates.
This is the best argument for this side in my opinion. Regardless of theory, this actually happened.
This makes me REALLY want to see something in the future where the college champion plays the worst ranked NFL team in an exhibition every year. And for that matter we should do the same thing with NCAA basketball and the NBA.
not to mention the MLB
-
This makes me REALLY want to see something in the future where the college champion plays the worst ranked NFL team in an exhibition every year.
That will never happen, for a variety of reasons. First, college players on the national championship team will now usually have to play 15 games in a season (12 Regular season games, conference championship, then a playoff game to get to the championship game). There's a decent chance that that could be moved up to 16 games when it is decided that the top 8 teams need to go to the new playoff system. That's 15-16 games of one of the most physically brutal sports there is in a span of just over four months. Now we want these unpaid college students, 70-80+% of whom (even on the championship team) will never get the big payoff of an NFL contract (and thus need to focus on things like, you know, getting a college degree) to play against a team of guys who have been handpicked by the foremost experts in the sport to play for their team. If I was a college kid (or the agent of a college kid) who is likely to be a high draft pick in the next NFL draft, why would I risk injury against a group of guys who have had superior training, and don't have to worry about grades, studying, or really anything at all aside from football.
Secondly, there is a tremendous amount of parity in the NFL, especially among teams that aren't upper echelon. This season, with the exception of the Seahawks, every division leader has lost at least one game to a team with a record of .500 or less, and even the Seahawks nearly lost to the team who is currently the worst-ranked team in the NFL early on in the season. I was witness to that parity yesterday, when I got to see live, before my very eyes, a mediocre 3-win team without its best player demoralize the team who had been until yesterday the hottest team in the NFL (and coached by a demigod, no less ::)). So if you think that the best college team could be competitive with the worst team in the NFL, then you are saying that they can be competitive with the best team in the NFL (which really is preposterous).
Thirdly, the NFL players wouldn't go for it either. Aside from being the laughingstock of a tough guy league if you lose, to literally no benefit (other than not being a laughingstock) if you win, you also risk injury. And when would this game be played? If it was after the regular season but before the draft, it is likely that you have a new coach for the NFL team, since the worst team in the league almost always fires their coach. Often the new coach isn't even hired for a few weeks to a month after the season. You also have players who have retired that certainly don't want to come back to play a meaningless game. Before too long players have been traded, picked up on free agency, not to mention the many changes that the college team would go through.
So while comments like "the best football team in Florida is the Seminoles" or "the best QB in Minnesota plays for the Gophers" (heard that one a lot this past season), will always be made in jest, or even semi-seriousness, they will never pan out in this particular sport.
-
Secondly, there is a tremendous amount of parity in the NFL, especially among teams that aren't upper echelon. This season, with the exception of the Seahawks, every division leader has lost at least one game to a team with a record of .500 or less, and even the Seahawks nearly lost to the team who is currently the worst-ranked team in the NFL early on in the season. I was witness to that parity yesterday, when I got to see live, before my very eyes, a mediocre 3-win team without its best player demoralize the team who had been until yesterday the hottest team in the NFL (and coached by a demigod, no less ::)). So if you think that the best college team could be competitive with the worst team in the NFL, then you are saying that they can be competitive with the best team in the NFL (which really is preposterous).
As much as I agree that a college team doesn't have any shot against an NFL team, I take an issue with this point. Just because a bad team can play with or beat a good team, does not mean they are at all on their level, or that a team that would beat the bad team would necessarily be able to beat the good team either. Teams have good games and bad games. So a bad team can have a good game and beat a good team that had a bad game that then has a bad game and lose to an even worse team who has a good a good game. That doesn't the even worse team could beat the good team, even when the worse team had a good game and the good team had a bad one.
-
Teams have good games and bad games. So a bad team can have a good game and beat a good team that had a bad game that then has a bad game and lose to an even worse team who has a good a good game.
I respect your opinion about NFL vs. college, even though I disagree, but I find it interesting that you will concede the point in this quote, and yet are not willing to accept that this could happen "on any given Sunday" between a great college team and a poor NFL team.
FTR, when I LOL'd about the simulator, I was laughing at the simulator, not you. That is actually just a pet peeve of mine about the authenticity of simulators in relation to sports. I didn't mean for that to come off as smug, but the -1 I got made me reread the post and realize I should have elaborated. I was typing in a hurry. I apologize for any offense.
-
I actually think a college team could beat a pro team because of how playing the game would affect decision making. If you are expected to lose, you can attempt stranger things and making higher risk decisions for the chance of higher reward. The variance of one game and one decision is so high that even an inferior team in every way can win by attempting to maximize variance, and then getting lucky and have that variance side with them.
On the aggregate though, it's ridiculous to assert that amateurs could consistent compete with and surpass professionals in football. They can't even do it with Poker yet.
-
I actually think a college team could beat a pro team because of how playing the game would affect decision making. If you are expected to lose, you can attempt stranger things and making higher risk decisions for the chance of higher reward. The variance of one game and one decision is so high that even an inferior team in every way can win by attempting to maximize variance, and then getting lucky and have that variance side with them.
On the aggregate though, it's ridiculous to assert that amateurs could consistent compete with and surpass professionals in football. They can't even do it with Poker yet.
this is sometimes referred go as the chip Kelly method.
-
The Jets will beat any division 3 college team you put in front of them! J-E-T-S! Jets! Jets! Jets! I'm telling you, the Jets are looking really solid. It's too bad all the other teams are so much better. If it wasn't for the other teams being better than the Jets, the Jets would have won another SuperBowl by now. >:( Maybe they can win next year.
-
I actually think a college team could beat a pro team because of how playing the game would affect decision making. If you are expected to lose, you can attempt stranger things and making higher risk decisions for the chance of higher reward. The variance of one game and one decision is so high that even an inferior team in every way can win by attempting to maximize variance, and then getting lucky and have that variance side with them.
On the aggregate though, it's ridiculous to assert that amateurs could consistent compete with and surpass professionals in football. They can't even do it with Poker yet.
this is sometimes referred go as the chip Kelly method.
He's an advanced stats dream
-
The Jets will beat any division 3 college team you put in front of them! J-E-T-S! Jets! Jets! Jets! I'm telling you, the Jets are looking really solid. It's too bad all the other teams are so much better. If it wasn't for the other teams being better than the Jets, the Jets would have won another SuperBowl by now. >:( Maybe they can win next year.
Your screenname is misspelled. It's spelled "Tony Romo".
-
The Jets will beat any division 3 college team you put in front of them! J-E-T-S! Jets! Jets! Jets! I'm telling you, the Jets are looking really solid. It's too bad all the other teams are so much better. If it wasn't for the other teams being better than the Jets, the Jets would have won another SuperBowl by now. >:( Maybe they can win next year.
Your screenname is misspelled. It's spelled "Tony Romo".
"I don't understand why the Cowboys actually lost that go so, Tony Romo!"
-
It probably had something to do with the two interceptions he threw in the last five minutes of the game.
-
It probably had something to do with the two interceptions he threw in the last five minutes of the game.
Let's see we have a 23 point lead, we're averaging 7 yards a xarrh, we have the worst defense in the NFL....
LETS KEEP THROWING THE BALL!
-
It probably had something to do with the two interceptions he threw in the last five minutes of the game.
I mean Romo's not blameless, but that loss was from a coaching meltdown, not a Romo one.
-
To be fair he apparently made a audible on the line to throw the last interception instead of running it, so yeah, that's on him.
-
To be fair he apparently made a audible on the line to throw the last interception instead of running it, so yeah, that's on him.
Which we wouldn't know about, except the coach responsible for 99% of the horrible playcalling in that game sold him out to try and save his own skin...yeah, I'm not a fan of the way Garrett handled anything about that game.
-
To be fair he apparently made a audible on the line to throw the last interception instead of running it, so yeah, that's on him.
No he didn't it was a read play. He had the option on the play between handing it off or pulling it out and passing it. Seeing where Clay Matthews was on that play, he pulled it out. At that point it was a good decision, if he had given it to Murray it would have been a loss of 4. A loss of 4 is preferrable to a pick but I think we can all agree Romo did not CHOOSE to throw a pick.
-
Romo should be smarter than to call a read pass in that situation.
-
Romo did not call the play. it was not an audible. it was a read. the first option on that play is run, the second is pass. he chose pass given that Clay Matthews was RIGHT THERE
-
Romo did not call the play. it was not an audible. it was a read. the first option on that play is run, the second is pass. he chose pass given that Clay Matthews was RIGHT THERE
My point is that the expected value in the read is not worth calling off the run at the line.
-
A better throw and it's a TD for Dallas this pounding the nails into the coffin on green bays season but then again tony should've known he was the throwing the ball so he shoulda just handed it off
-
Romo did not call the play. it was not an audible. it was a read. the first option on that play is run, the second is pass. he chose pass given that Clay Matthews was RIGHT THERE
My point is that the expected value in the read is not worth calling off the run at the line.
He didn't call off the run at the line, its like a read option except instead of taking off running he throws the ball. It was a designed read play from the time it was called until the time the ball was thrown
-
It probably had something to do with the two interceptions he threw in the last five minutes of the game.
I mean Romo's not blameless, but that loss was from a coaching meltdown, not a Romo one.
I think it's the other way around. Bad decision making ruins games, but two interceptions in that amount of time and under those circumstances is inexcusable from an NFL quarterback, especially one as prolific as Romo. It also doesn't help that this is far from the first time he's choked like this. You can blame the decision making all you want, and it was horrendous, but I still think Romo is to blame for that loss.
-
A better throw and it's a TD for Dallas this pounding the nails into the coffin on green bays season
No kidding. After all the Vikings did to help the Cowboys on Sunday, you'd think they could manage to NOT lose that game... >:( But I guess the next best thing to the Packers missing the playoffs would be for them to get destroyed by Carolina/New Orleans/San Francisco in the first round.