Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/20/2018 in all areas

  1. 11 points
    Proposed to girlfriend last night. She said yes.
  2. 7 points
  3. 6 points
    Hello everyone, it's been a while since I did this. I figured I had a good thing going when I did the data for 2004-2017, and I wanted to do something for other eras as well. So I'm looking back at the timespan from 1990-2003 to figure out the answers to some important questions. How did the long term starters of the era fare when their defense was above par, and when their defense was below par. I used the same methodology as the last time I did this, finding the point where the average defense lies in my selected time span. From 1990-2003, the average defense gave up about 20.3 points, about 2 points lower than modern defenses do today, so I set the breaking point at 21 points. If your defense allowed less points than that, they had a good game, if they allowed more, they had a bad game. The null hypothesis is that the average QB will win every game his defense allows less than the average amount of points, and will lose every game the defense allows greater than the average amount of points. Obviously, the data shows that this isn't true due to games where both teams score 20 or less points, and games where both teams score 21 or more points. The real percentages over this time span show that the average QB can be expected to win 74.23% of the time his defense holds up, and a mere 22.86% of the time his defense crumbles. With those numbers gathered, I looked for every QB who had at least 90 starts and put them onto the list for analysis. I added one exception who was fairly close to the amount of starts simply because he was one of the most impactful QB's of the era, and it felt wrong to leave him off the list. The reason for 90 was just because I wanted a round number, and 96 would be 6 full seasons of games, so going a little under due to injuries and such felt better than going a little over. I managed to get a list of 25 guys. Some played their entire career in the time span, some only had the tail end of their careers in there, and a few guys were just starting up. Neither Tom Brady nor Joe Montana made the list due to lack of starts in the era. I curated some games, removing starts where players only played a few snaps before getting hurt, or adding starts where they came in relief, because the place I get my data from just counts starts as the QB who plays the first snap. Anyway, let's get right into the data. First let's look at the winningest QB's of the era: https://i.imgur.com/tP5DoKU.png As you can see, there's a lot of names you'd expect at the top, Steve Young, Jim Kelly, John Elway and Brett Favre. Meanwhile the bottom is about what you'd expect as well, with Jim Everett, Jeff George, Jeff Blake and the like at the bottom. It's a good indicator, but it doesn't tell us how their defenses held up, and it's really just a blase look at things, so let's keep exploring, and see which of these guys had the best defenses. Sorted by Good Defense percentage: https://i.imgur.com/9PGxixv.png So this was something I found interesting. I was not expecting Troy Aikman to have the best defenses of the bunch, but as it turns out he just narrowly edged out Steve Young, who I was expecting to be really high up there in that regard. Despite only playing 12 games for the Ravens, Trent Dilfer has the third best defenses of the bunch, bolstered by his time in Tampa with Tony Dungy and their Tampa 2 defenses. On the other end, you've got the guys whose defenses gave up a lot of points. Jake Plummer, Jeff George, Jim Everett, and Peyton Manning who unlike those other guys managed to pull out a winning record despite his porous defenses. Jeff Blake sitting at the bottom makes a ton of sense when you realize he played for the Bengals, Saints and Cardinals, all before they got good (if they ever did). Continuing on, let's sort these guys by how they performed when the chips were down, and their defenses gave up 21+ points a game. Remember that the average win percentage in these games is a hair below 23%, so if the percentages look low, that's why. Anything above 23% is basically a passing grade in this curve. https://i.imgur.com/Shltje6.png This would be about what you'd expect. Guys like Young, Kelly and Elway cut their teeth on winning in tough situations, winning over 40% of the time. Add in Favre, Cunningham, Rich Gannon, and Steve McNair who all won over a third of the time and you have a very impressive group overall. Peyton is right behind them as well, but he boasts a 50% rate post 2004 which is insanity only matched or surpassed by one Thomas Brady. Meanwhile the bottom of the list is anchored by everyone's favourite bust, Jeff George. And lastly, what you've all been waiting for, the metric that sorts all of these numbers out nice and evenly, my derived Wins over Average stat. https://i.imgur.com/bVWC8Ae.png This was probably the biggest surprise of all for me. I was expecting this to be Steve Young when I first started this, with about a 20% it'd be Favre somehow. However Jim Kelly is the man up top, averaging an entire 2.82 wins more than the average QB would in his situation. If you want to know why the Bills went to 4 super bowls in the 90's, you don't need to look much farther than Kelly. Though he doesn't get the accolades that Marino and Elway did, there is no question that he's the superior member in the 90's. Steve Young finished a little bit behind with 2.7, Brett Favre had a very strong 2.34, and even outside of his prime years, Peyton still managed to be 2.07 wins over average. Troy Aikman may not be thought of as a good QB, since he was carried by some great teams, but he still managed to be a win above average, which places him with contemporaries like Joe Flacco and Matt Schaub. Dan Marino didn't do too hot, but considering he lost both of his pro bowl receivers in 92, it doesn't really surprise me that he's not dominating this section of the list. His prime was definitely in the 80's. Moving down the list, Trent Dilfer managed to be a shade above average, netting about .17 more wins a season than the average QB would. It's nothing impressive, and his closest contemporary in the modern era would be Alex Smith, another QB who did alright with great defenses, but Smith never lucked into a ring. Jeff Blake is our closest to average QB, netting a mere 0.01 more losses a season than the typical QB, which is virtually 0 at that point. So if you want to say you're a decent starter in this league you need to be better than Jeff Blake. Let's look at guys who are worst than Jeff Blake. Drew Bledsoe, who does pretty well in high scoring games, but vanishes in a lot of defensive struggles. Vinny Testaverde and Chris Chandler, career journeymen with long careers and stormy injury history. Jake Plummer and Kerry Collins, about half a game worse per season than average starters, started early on bad teams and have their best years cut off by the range of this sample size. Then you have the trash. Something interesting about this data set is that there are a lot of QB's with enough starts to qualify who fall well below average. In the modern era list, the only guy below average was Ryan Fitzpatrick, who journeymaned his way to starts on lots of teams. The guys here did it much the same way he did, 90's QBs had a lot looser leash it seems. Jim Harbaugh flamed out with a good Bears defense, and depsite having some of the best defenses out of all the guys on the list, he couldn't manage a .500 record. Boomer was old and miserable, and got his prime years in the 80's cut off by the sample size. His performance when his defense showed up was pathetic, even when he managed to be average when his defense didn't. Jeff George was a colossal bust and his numbers are even buoyed because he got to throw to Jerry Rice, Tim Brown, and Randy Moss in his career. Lastly the worst of the worst was Jim Everett, a guy who could barely win a third of his games. His 21-18 mark when his defense actually showed up is by far the worst I've seen thus far. He may have been on some bad teams, but that is beyond pathetic. The -1.38 WAR is also the worst mark I've seen thus far, below Ryan Fitzpatrick. --- Anyway, this was a lot of fun to make up, and I may do some more in the future, especially since certain QB's aren't represented well, or got their primes cut off by the era. The next data set would be 1978-1989, the start of the 16 game era, as well as the introduction of the Mel Blount rule. If you have any questions, want any trivia or whatever, feel free to let me know. And here is the link to my data sheet. Thanks for reading guys. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nAyFHNzY2KESR7XK3w2IipuFW2Zc3FJKXkc7rodbIVs/edit?usp=sharing
  4. 5 points
    Well well well, looks like we have ourselves a moron boys.
  5. 5 points
    " Baby, I've looked at the tape and I've come to the conclusion that you have perennial wife talent. The tape doesn't lie. Will you marry me? "
  6. 5 points
    The hospital literally makes up costs that they then say they are charging, all so they can "cut their prices" for the insurance. When you have people who literally have to wear wristbands that say "do not call an ambulance if I have a seizure" you know how badly this country is fucked. And its annoying as hell, because somehow people blame us at the pharmacy. Your local pharmacy is not the one who sets the prices, its the insurance. I am right there with you being outraged by these prices. And by completely underhanded tactics. Here's you another example. Patient who needed an inhaler, was literally having trouble breathing right in front of me. The insurance would only cover it if it was a 30-day supply. This inhaler only came in 25 days supply, that's just how it comes. I called them on the phone to discuss the situation and try to get him something else. We wanted to swap him to a different one that does the same thing but is a 30 day supply. Not covered. Tried a different one. Not covered. At this point the pharmacist is as angry as I've ever seen him and asks what the hell they want us to do. Keep in mind each time this happened, we had hung up on them being assured it would go through if it was a 30 day supply, and then had to re-dial them after we had gotten the product out and then discovered its still not covered. They wanted us to special order yet another inhaler which is actually way more expensive BUT they have a better contract with its makers so they can cover it (that was our guess as that is the case a lot of times, they didn't exactly specify that). Since it was only made in three locations in the US, it would take at least three days to get here. Meanwhile the gentleman is still struggling to breathe. Pharmacist told them to go to hell and re-sent the claim through for the original one and manually changed the day supply on the inhaler to a 30 day one and then overrode the computer just so it would go through their systems. He got in a lot of trouble for it a couple weeks later, with a rep from the insurance company coming in to whine about it. Just another example of how fucked the insurance is in this country. OR Formulary lists. All insurance companies have a list of drugs they cover called their formulary. The insurance new year starts on July 1, so a lot of times come July 2, a lot of patients suddenly have drugs they have been getting regularly that are no longer covered. Does the insurance even bother to notify them? Of course not.
  7. 5 points
    There is no good advice in my opinion. Losing anything that meaningful is going to hurt no matter what. One thing I will say is you never regret the moments you spend with something you love. As much time as you can devote to her, do it, it will not be a regret. It may also help to be positively patient with yourself. Realize that it is going to suck and you are going to be hurt, and there is no time table for it. It will take as long as it takes for the grieving process, and there really is no arbitrary measurement for how long it takes to get over it. She truly will be in a better place. Whether that be heaven or not suffering, she will experience peace. She won't be in agony every day. I think we all have a point where suffering is no longer preferable even for those we love. The last thing is remember you were the center of her world. She loved you immensley and love will always stay with you. And do not second guess forgoing chemo. It is not a bad decision. She is going to need you and I have always found that we can learn lessons from death about a life well lived. She will pass with people around who lover and love in her heart. That is something to be revered.
  8. 5 points
    Lol. I have went to bat for you time and time again, asked people personally both in private and in threads not to be dicks to you. Said you were a good dude numerous times in the shout box that can be backed up by most regular members. You are such a pussy. Peace.
  9. 5 points
    All I've read about this is from people on both sides of the aisle virtue signaling on Quora. I find it remarkable that everyone on both sides (at least on Quora, I haven't kept up with it much in this thread) is absolutely convinced that they are 100% right and justified in their stance, and that both sides passionately play the role of victim. This is more like a soap opera than anything else. I have a hard time believing a woman would put herself on a platform like this with a false allegation but people on the left that I've read are so black and white about this issue. I still struggle to believe that people think calling those who disagree with them (or in this case say "innocent until proven guilty") bigots is productive at all. Edit: Like I said I don't pretend false accusations are common but I think this shit about women never lying about sexual assault is dumb. Statistically it's rare but when dealing with individual cases, to just throw our that possibility is absurd. I don't think we should inherently believe women but I also think sexual assault is serious enough to the point that these accusations should be heard and explored. I've seen people say there's no reason a woman would do that, that's idiotic. It's not a smart move but there are plenty of reasons. I suspect that Kavanaugh did it because he seems like a piece of shit and like I said I don't see this as a case where she'd put herself through this kind of shit storm for the sake of the Democratic party. I don't think there's very much evidence. If what I've read is true at all it's basically conservatives saying there's no evidence and thus the accusations can't be proven true, and liberals going with "gut instincts" (like in all honesty I am) in their "assessment" and saying he's a predator. Lmao, I saw some dude say his body language and facial expressions were what you'd expect of a sociopath, so clearly he did it. People like that are beyond idiotic and a prime example of the aforementioned virtue signaling I bitch about so frequently. I also think people are a lot more complex than specific moments in their life. This isn't me defending Kavanaugh, because I think I already said he seems like he's a piece of shit in real life, but more so that there's also an entire lifetime of experiences that form his identity. This is true of literally every human yet we live in a disgusting society where a metaphorical soundbyte of a person's life determines their character. If people judged me from how I was when I was abusing weed and psychotic as well (and they ACTUALLY knew who I was) they'd think I was a piece of shit yet everything else in my life reinforces I'm a morally ambiguous person that tends towards being decent. What really gets me is that I don't even think these people care. I don't think they care about Ford or Kavanaugh, or what this means for the country, I think they only see people they disagree with getting fired up and have to provide an equal and opposite force. I don't think people actually care about the MeToo movement which is unfortunate, I know some people who felt empowered by it to seek therapy to overcome that past. Seems more and more like people retweet and favorite and upvote stuff like that just so they come off as a good person on social media. It seems so fake to me. Rant over.
  10. 4 points
  11. 4 points
    Let's all take a moment and appreciate how old we all are now that cherry's out here getting married.
  12. 4 points
    Oh, so this is your fault.
  13. 4 points
  14. 4 points
    I think another thing that hasn't been mentioned but should be a gimmie here for everyone is that this guy is looking at a lifetime appointment. He should be vetted with finest of toothed Combs. Isn't that commons sense. If it's not true what's to fear from an investigation?
  15. 4 points
    Sorry, busy weekend and I just got back, we won't be doing the draft today because I still need to get the team owners settled out. I'm planning on doing the draft Wednesday at 9, if that doesn't work for anyone let me know now because we're down to the wire for getting the draft done before Thursday. As of now, the participants will be as follows: Me Ace Phil MHG BC Than F4E Ngata ATL Vin Bjorn Seanbrock Basically, it's last year's participants with Sean instead of my brother, that way we're back to just members of the board and it's a 12 team league, which I think is the ideal size. Sean has joined so at this point I'm working on getting my brother's team removed and switching F4E to a different ESPN account EDIT: Okay, so we're down to the 12 teams listed above, just waiting for F4E's new email so I can get his team updated, still looking to set the draft Wednesday at 9 ET, sorry for any confusion and inconvenience today.
  16. 3 points
    Mike Zimmer took a team to the conference championship game and then they decided to blow a quarter of their salary cap on a mediocre at best QB. Vikings would be incredibly dumb to fire Zimmer.
  17. 3 points
    Let's hear em! CotY: Matt Nagy This one was kinda hard to figure out. Andy Reid comes to mind, as the Chiefs are 8-1, but we kinda expected the Chiefs to be good, just not this good. Nagy has done wonders as a first year HC in Chicago, and has the Bears in prime position for a playoff run. MVP(s): Drew Brees , Patrick Mahomes Right now I really can't choose between them. Here's hoping the next eight games gives me a clear answer, because these two are both fantastic. OPOY: Todd Gurley Gurley might be challenging for LT's single season TD record. He is one part of a great machine, but he does his job so well. DPOY: Khalil Mack Mack has been so disruptive over the first half of the season, he's been hurt for the past couple of games, but he's still DPOY at this point. OROY: Saquon Barkley Saquon is at worst the 2nd best player on the Giants already, halfway through his rookie year, and he is the sole bright spot for the Giants in a year that is completely lost. Get him a QB next year and the Gmen could make some noise. DROY: Donte Jackson The rookie corner out of LSU has 4 picks through 8 games and is able to cover man to man and zone, as well as stopping the run. CPotY: Andrew Luck Luck looks like his old self and is enjoying football up in Indianapolis. The Colts probably don't make the postseason this year, but get him some weapons and next year they could be a surprise team.
  18. 3 points
    I wonder what happens if the Jags would’ve gone and got Cousins.
  19. 3 points
    Tulsi Gabbard came out and said that Trump is Saudi Arabia’s bitch. Lmao. She isn’t wrong. #ThatsMyPresident
  20. 3 points
    Coach of the Year: Bill Belichick. What you can't give Belichick the coach of the year, he's always the best coach in the NFL, that's not fair to the other guys. Ok, let's switch things up a bit. The Coach of the Year*: Adam Gase Wow, how fucking dare I, right? Well let's face it, the Dolphins are not a talented team, and they were lauded for dumping talented players like Ndamukong Suh, Jay Ajayi and JArvis Landry for practically nothing. Is this team good? I don't think so, but this team should be Raiders or 49ers level bad this season, yet they are finding gritty ways to win games, getting the most out of ICU patient Ryan Tannehill and the meme of the century Brock Osweiler, and winning games that they probably shouldn't be. These players are buying into what Gase is giving them, and while they're a ways out of beating talented squads, they are handling themselves well. It's actually just Belichick though. Offensive Rookie of the Year: Saquon Barkley, RB, The lone bright spot on that offense, now that Eli has reverted into a captain checkdown. He's dynamic, exciting, and good to bust a big play almost every week. If he had more than one capable blocker he might be putting up Gurley type numbers if not better. Defensive Rookie of the Year: Nathan Peterman... wait shit. uh, Let's give the Browns some love, Denzel Ward, CB, There are so many good rookies that you could make a team out of them this year. Fred Warner, Darius Leonard, Derwin James, Donte Jackson, Minkah Fitzpatrick, and Leighton Vander Esch, among others all have legitimate arguments for this spot, but I have to go with Ward. He's all over the place on defense, a very solid tackler, and the primary reason they won any games at all this season. The Browns might suck, but he doesn't. Comeback Player of the Year: J.J. Watt, DE, 9 sacks halfway through the season... yeah dude is back. He finally looks healthy, he's shedding offensive linemen like nothing and... Defensive Player of the Year: J.J. Watt, DE, Yeah make this a double. Watt is once again the best player on the defensive side of the ball, sorry. Offensive Player of the Year, aka the we can't give you the MVP, here have a participation trophy: Todd Gurley, RB, 1230 yards from scrimmage, 16 TDs halfway through the season, Gurley is a production machine, and the Rams are content to feed the machine. I'm looking forward to seeing him chase the non-passing TD record. The Saints did a great job stifling him though. Best Player: Drew Brees, QB, The league owes him after Peyton Manning stole his MVP award. He's also the best QB in football, which is what this award should actually be called. The Most Valuable Player to his team, but not necessarily the best player in the league, because we don't have a Most Oustanding Player award to split the difference award: Cam Newton, QB, Because fuck he deserves some credit for the work he's doing this year that gets consistently shat on and undone by his garbage coaches.
  21. 3 points
    The 5th one is me. Losing a pet is always tough, it's like getting a piece of your heart ripped out. It's best to just let the grief overtake you, let all your emotions out, and over time you remember all the good times you had with them. I've lost two cats in my life, and both of them were just total sweethearts. I get a little sad when I know that I'll never see them again, but I have so many fun memories about them that it's hard to feel depressed about it. I think I gave them happy times and they certainly made my life better for being in it. Time heals all wounds may be a cliche, but it's only that way because it's true.
  22. 3 points
    After a few bumps in the road ( like having to perform the full board conversion from my phone).... We’re here! Everything is still a work in progress, so if you notice anything — no matter how big or small — say something so Vin / I can address it. One thing already on tap is a lighter skin for those of you who don’t dig the dark or default stuff. I have a 4 day weekend coming up here so that’ll hopefully be done by the end of next week! Anything else though, anything at all... let us know. See something, Say something!
  23. 3 points
    I don't think that's the heart of the issue. Considering the largest state in the country has less than a 2% difference between their population and electorate power. The bigger problem in my mind is that 48 of our states are "all or nothing". Theoretically, if Stevo and I are running for President -- Stevo can beat me in California 51 - 49 and he gets all 55 votes from California. Conversely, I could beat Stevo in Texas 50 - 50 (by a single vote) and take all 34 of their votes. EDIT: Nebraska and Maine. Each state gives 2 votes to the winner of the popular vote, than an extra vote for each winner of the individual congressional districts. Not saying we all should even do that. Could just lead to even more gerrymandering. Could make it a straight percentage though. If you win 55% of the vote, you get 55% of the electoral votes or some such system.
  24. 3 points
    I mean that's one take for sure, but the other take is that you prevent politicians from serving Regional interests of Big state's such as New York, California, Texas, and a few others. It was designed so that you could not win an election off of four states, or the most populous states in the future. Which I think is a good idea.
  25. 3 points
    That was in a game that matters. You'll find the Falcons specialize in games that don't.