Jump to content
IGNORED

Are you ready for some NFL Football? 2014 Edition.


phan52
Note: This thread is 3247 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

ARE YOU SAD BRO? [URL=http://screengrabber.deadspin.com/richard-shermans-face-says-it-all-1683158726]http://screengrabber.deadspin.com/richard-shermans-face-says-it-all-1683158726[/URL]

That is funny stuff!

:adams: / :tmade: / :edel: / :aimpoint: / :ecco: / :bushnell: / :gamegolf: / 

Eyad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

That is funny stuff!

I didn't find it funny. I actually like Sherman. If anyone actually listen to him talk he's a really smart guy. Heck he went to Stanford. He is totally 100% a football player. He has to have Tommy John Surgery and he played in the Superbowl.

http://thebiglead.com/2015/02/01/tom-brady-jumping-around-celebrating-seattles-unbelievable-interception/

My favorite though is Tom Brady jumping around. No one is near him at all and he's in his own happy place.


On a side note,

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/new-report-says-only-one-patriots-football-was-seriously-deflated-165514858.html

Sounds like a lot of the reports were highly over exaggerated about the footballs. The other footballs were just slightly under.

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I didn't find it funny. I actually like Sherman. If anyone actually listen to him talk he's a really smart guy. Heck he went to Stanford. He is totally 100% a football player. He has to have Tommy John Surgery and he played in the Superbowl.  [URL=http://thebiglead.com/2015/02/01/tom-brady-jumping-around-celebrating-seattles-unbelievable-interception/]http://thebiglead.com/2015/02/01/tom-brady-jumping-around-celebrating-seattles-unbelievable-interception/[/URL] My favorite though is Tom Brady jumping around. No one is near him at all and he's in his own happy place.  [rule] On a side note,  [URL=http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/new-report-says-only-one-patriots-football-was-seriously-deflated-165514858.html]http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/new-report-says-only-one-patriots-football-was-seriously-deflated-165514858.html[/URL] Sounds like a lot of the reports were highly over exaggerated about the footballs. The other footballs were just slightly under.

Just because I found his facial expressions funny doesn't mean I think he is stupid, or think any less of him. However, I'm sure he'll appreciate your support of him and his educational background.

:adams: / :tmade: / :edel: / :aimpoint: / :ecco: / :bushnell: / :gamegolf: / 

Eyad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Just because I found his facial expressions funny doesn't mean I think he is stupid, or think any less of him. However, I'm sure he'll appreciate your support of him and his educational background.

You are correct and I apologize for making it sound like you did.

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I didn't find it funny. I actually like Sherman. If anyone actually listen to him talk he's a really smart guy. Heck he went to Stanford. He is totally 100% a football player. He has to have Tommy John Surgery and he played in the Superbowl.

http://thebiglead.com/2015/02/01/tom-brady-jumping-around-celebrating-seattles-unbelievable-interception/

My favorite though is Tom Brady jumping around. No one is near him at all and he's in his own happy place.

I agree about Sherman.  He was also one of the classiest Seahawks after the devastating loss.

The rest in in response to various points, not necessary yours.

As to the playcall, I do not care how much people want to try to rehabilitate it it is a no go.  EVEN IF we concede, for the sake of discussion, that calling a pass play was not as absurd as most people think, it was a terrible pass play to call.

It was a bang bang play.  Wilson whole job was to take the snap, drop back and fire.  There was no read involved.  Which meant he had no option to throw it away.  A slower developing pass play, a fade (if Plax said that he was right) or a pass to the back of the endzone, one a QB can just hoist over everyone, would have been a far safer choice, since it would have afforded Wilson the option of throwing the ball away and living to run another day..

And the analogies to the aggression at the end of the half are inapt, IMO.  The big difference being that you do not lose the game if the first half gamble does not pay off.  You are a serious underdog in catch-up mode - the risks are justified.  But taking the same risk when  you have put yourself in the position of overwhelming favorite (c'mon, right before the INT, when it is second and goal from the one yard line and you have 2 great runners in Lynch and Wilson in your backfield, what kind of odds could you have gotten in Vegas if you bet that that the Pats win that game?  1000 to 1?) is just situationally crazy.

But then again, what the hell do I know?

Rich - in name only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Tom Brady gave his newly acquired Super Bowl  Chevy truck to Malcolm Butler. Just another classy move by a classy QB.  It doesn't surprise me the Patriots are a first class team!

Someone needed to bail out his 2 interceptions.

Ryan M
 
The Internet Adjustment Formula:
IAD = ( [ADD] * .96 + [EPS] * [1/.12] ) / (1.15)
 
IAD = Internet Adjusted Distance (in yards)
ADD = Actual Driver Distance (in yards)
EPS = E-Penis Size (in inches)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator

Quote:

Originally Posted by club ho

Tom Brady gave his newly acquired Super Bowl  Chevy truck to Malcolm Butler. Just another classy move by a classy QB.  It doesn't surprise me the Patriots are a first class team!

Someone needed to bail out his 2 interceptions.

13 - 15 for 124 yards and two TDs on the final two drives against the "Legion of Boom", highest rated defense in the NFL.  That is pretty good. :-)

Scott

Titleist, Edel, Scotty Cameron Putter, Snell - AimPoint - Evolvr - MirrorVision

My Swing Thread

boogielicious - Adjective describing the perfect surf wave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

A good stat to support throwing the ball on 2nd down for Seattle.

Teams who threw the ball were 9% more likely to score a TD at the 1 yard line.

Out of the near 110 times a ball was thrown from the 1 yard line, only ONCE was the ball intercepted, and that was at the Superbowl.

Lynch is actually not that good at scoring from with in 5 yards of the goal line. He is well below the league average in scoring TD's with in 5 yards rushing the ball.

A saw those stats (and others that showed overall poor TD results in running from the 1 yard line). Here is why I would dispute that thought process.

The Seahawks had just run the ball from the 6 yard line on first down to the 1 yard line and there were 58 seconds left when the ball was spotted. NE did not have their goal line defense in the game at the time. But, because the Seahawks started overthinking the process and added another component to their thinking (the clock), they decided to deflate the ball (pun intended) and run time off the clock, which allowed the Pats time to get their goal line defense on the field. That is what led them to call the ill-advise play (I am far more critical of the play call than the actual idea to pass).

The Seahawks should not have been thinking about the clock in that circumstance. They should have been thinking only of scoring the go-ahead TD and, if they had lined up immediately and run a play, they most probably would have scored against the unprepared NE defense. If not, THEN the clock works in their favor and they still have two downs to score with a timeout in hand.

I will also defend Belichick in not calling a timeout while the clock was running down. I believe he thought chances were good that Seattle would score, and he knew there was no way their offense could mount a drive for a tying FG without a timeout in hand. Odds are way against you in that circumstance without at least one opportunity to stop the clock.

Bill M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Great article on 538 explaining why there definitely was one head coach who screwed up the endgame on Sunday:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-head-coach-botched-the-end-of-the-super-bowl-and-it-wasnt-pete-carroll/

(Warning:  there is math so if you don't like math, then run!!!) :beer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post

Great article on 538 explaining why there definitely was one head coach who screwed up the endgame on Sunday:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-head-coach-botched-the-end-of-the-super-bowl-and-it-wasnt-pete-carroll/

(Warning:  there is math so if you don't like math, then run!!!) :beer:

Quote:
In the article:
Sounds crazy, but he’s right: With 26 seconds left and only one timeout, the Seahawks couldn’t run Lynch three times in a row. If they rushed on second down, didn’t make it in, called timeout, rushed again, and still didn’t make it in, they’d probably be out of time before they could get off another play. So, the Seahawks had three downs to work with, but they could only run Lynch twice at most.

As I said before, using the 26 second  times 3 plays metric is all wrong. The clock was at 58 seconds when the play clock was reset for second down. They had plenty of time to run 3 plays.

And the Belichick criticism about not taking a timeout doesn't consider how hard it is to get in position for a FG with zero opportunities to stop the clock. He believed that he needed that timeout for a potential drive, no matter how much time was left.

Bill M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

As I said before, using the 26 second  times 3 plays metric is all wrong. The clock was at 58 seconds when the play clock was reset for second down. They had plenty of time to run 3 plays.

And the Belichick criticism about not taking a timeout doesn't consider how hard it is to get in position for a FG with zero opportunities to stop the clock. He believed that he needed that timeout for a potential drive, no matter how much time was left.

Two reasons that doesn't really make sense:  If you don't use the timeout then Seattle can bleed it down to 0:01 before they run their fourth down play, so what are you saving it for?

And, secondly, according to the espn box score, they had 2 timeouts remaining before the intereception.  They used their second after that play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Two reasons that doesn't really make sense:  If you don't use the timeout then Seattle can bleed it down to 0:01 before they run their fourth down play, so what are you saving it for?

And, secondly, according to the espn box score, they had 2 timeouts remaining before the interception.  They used their second after that play.

Hmmm . . . interesting. I assumed he only had the one timeout. Then he is a dumbass. :-)

Yet, here is an article positing that not taking the timeout was genius and forced Carroll into the ill-fated play call due to dwindling time.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2015/02/02/bill-belichick-made-a-sneaky-smart-decision-that-might-have-contributed-to-fateful-play-call-by-pete-carroll/

But that, again, doesn't take into consideration that there WAS plenty of time left (58 seconds) when the play clock was set for second down. Judging from all this, I believe that Belichick would have called a timeout if Seattle had gone straight to the line of scrimmage to run a play instead of dawdling like they did. That would also have allowed him to get his goal line defense into the game, which was probably more important to him at the moment.

Bill M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post

Great article on 538 explaining why there definitely was one head coach who screwed up the endgame on Sunday:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-head-coach-botched-the-end-of-the-super-bowl-and-it-wasnt-pete-carroll/

(Warning:  there is math so if you don't like math, then run!!!) :beer:

Here is where that article falls apart.

Quote:
Sounds crazy, but he’s right: With 26 seconds left and only one timeout, the Seahawks couldn’t run Lynch three times in a row. If they rushed on second down, didn’t make it in, called timeout, rushed again, and still didn’t make it in, they’d probably be out of time before they could get off another play. So, the Seahawks had three downs to work with, but they could only run Lynch twice at most.

Because if you run Lynch on 2nd & 1 and do not make it, BELICHICK has to call the time out.  Otherwise Seattle runs it down to 10 sec before THEY call a time-out - just long enough for an incomplete pass and then the winning rush.  BB cannot risk that so HE would have to have called the TO to preserve some chance (which is why he should have called timeout right after the 5 yard gain on first down.  BB could NOT prevent Seattle from running 3 plays so why wouldn't he call that timeout?  But Seatlle needed to run the ball in order to force BB's hand.  IMO neither coach acquitted himself well, tactically.  Lynch's gain on 1st down gave them the ability to run the ball

Even if we accept their situational stats, 1 INT in 66 passes is still a 1.6% chance of losing a game that you already have 99% won EVEN IF you just forget about trying to get 3 plays and just run Lynch twice.

They can put all the lipstick they want on it, it is still a pig of a call.

If you run Lynch twice you have about a 99+% chance of winning the game*.  Any alternate course of action has to improve those odds, and if we ignore situational stats, Wilson gets intercepted on 2.5% of his passes.

*

He fumbles 0.7% of the time and gets stuffed 7% of the time.  Which means he has about a 92% chance of scoring on one play.  Which means he has a 99.36% chance of scoring if they run him twice.  And the turnover risk is way lower since Wilson's INT percent is 3.5 times Lynch's fumble rate.

Run:  .7% chance of losing with fumble - 7% chance of indecisive - got stuffed, 92% chance of winning.

Pass:  2.5% chance of losing with INT - 34.5% chance of indecisive (incomplete but not INT) - 63% chance of winning.

Now consider, that on one running play there was a 92% chance of winning outright.  If we look at the dds of winning if they run it twice with Lynch the odds of winning become 99.36%.  How do you pass that up?  For some chimerical desire to get a third play?  99.36% isn't a good enough chance of winning.

The problem with the argument in the article is that you do not seriously decrease your chances on play 1 in the hopes of what might happen on plays 2 and 3.  Not when you have the ball inside the 1.  Because if you do the right thing on the first play then 92% of the time there are no play 2 and play 3s.  Maximizing your odds on play 2 t the expense of your odds on play 1 is just wrong, IMO.

But then again, what the hell do I know?

Rich - in name only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I thought Carroll said the pass play that ended in a debacle was a throw away play.  Why was there a need for a throw away play when  they had to score a TD for the win?  They had limited time and needed to get it in the endzone.  If they could have won with a FG the concept of a throw away play makes more sense.

Joe Paradiso

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I didn't find it funny. I actually like Sherman. If anyone actually listen to him talk he's a really smart guy. Heck he went to Stanford. He is totally 100% a football player. He has to have Tommy John Surgery and he played in the Superbowl.

http://thebiglead.com/2015/02/01/tom-brady-jumping-around-celebrating-seattles-unbelievable-interception/

My favorite though is Tom Brady jumping around. No one is near him at all and he's in his own happy place.

On a side note,

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/new-report-says-only-one-patriots-football-was-seriously-deflated-165514858.html

Sounds like a lot of the reports were highly over exaggerated about the footballs. The other footballs were just slightly under.

I never questioned Sherman intelligence. It was a retort to his busting TB's ass when the Seahawks beat the Pats last year. He went up to Brady and said  "Are you mad bro". If you can't take it don't dish it out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I thought Carroll said the pass play that ended in a debacle was a throw away play.  Why was there a need for a throw away play when  they had to score a TD for the win?  They had limited time and needed to get it in the endzone.  If they could have won with a FG the concept of a throw away play makes more sense.

He did ... but he also said that about 10 minutes after the fact, so he probably hadn't really digested everything that just happened yet.

I just took it to mean that it was clock management related.  Not that it was literally a wasted play, because if so, they'd have just throw one out of bounds or something, but that they chose a pass to stop the clock if it didn't work and then they'd be able to run twice (if they so desired) after that.  If they ran on second and didn't get in, then their options would have been more limited on third down (a pass of some kind of risk not getting to fourth).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

He did ... but he also said that about 10 minutes after the fact, so he probably hadn't really digested everything that just happened yet.

I just took it to mean that it was clock management related.  Not that it was literally a wasted play, because if so, they'd have just throw one out of bounds or something, but that they chose a pass to stop the clock if it didn't work and then they'd be able to run twice (if they so desired) after that.  If they ran on second and didn't get in, then their options would have been more limited on third down (a pass of some kind of risk not getting to fourth).

Plus Lynch has a poor record on goal and short runs. Add to that the PATS stacked the line with bigs it makes sense to try a short slant pass. Which statistically has a very high success rate. Bottom line both Browner who blocked the pick and especially Butler made sensational plays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Note: This thread is 3247 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • I did read the fine print tonight. It said replace with “similar features & function”.  8 yeas ago my purchase had features that today are available on the lower end models and the current version of my model has more “bells & whistles” than what I got 8 years ago.  So I am thinking they honored the agreement and I can’t argue the offer. since getting a credit for the full purchase price all I am really out over the past 8 years was the cost of the extended warranty, which was less than a low end  treadmill would have cost me. now the question is which model to replace with.  I’ll stay with Nordic Track or I forfeit the $1,463 credit so I will get Nordic Track.  And they honored the warranty and were not hard to work with which is a plus.
    • Generally speaking, extended warranties are a terrible deal and should almost always be avoided. They are a huge profit center for the companies that offer them, which should tell you almost everything you need to know about how much value most consumers get when purchasing them.  This is correct, and the old adage applies - only buy insurance when you can't afford the loss. This usually doesn't apply to most consumer goods.  To your second question, no I don't believe the offer is fair. They are replacing it, but it is not being replaced at "no cost to you". Since the amount being disputed (over $500) is non-trivial, I would probably push the issue. Don't waste your time on the phone with a customer service agent or a supervisor. They have probably given you all they have the authority to do. Rather, I would look at the terms of your agreement and specifically legal disputes. The odds are you probably agreed to binding arbitration in the event of a dispute. The agreement will outline what steps need to be followed, but it will probably look something like this.  1. Mail the Nordic Track legal department outlining your dispute and indicate you are not satisfied with the resolution offered.  2. Open up a case with the AAA (American Arbitration Association), along with the required documentation. 3. Wait about 4-5 weeks for a case to be opened - at which point someone from Nordic Track's legal department will offer to give you the new model at no cost to you.  They certainly don't want to spend the time and energy to fight you over $500. 4. Enjoy your new Nordic Track at no cost to you. I recently entered binding arbitration against a fairly large and well known company that screwed me over and refused to make it right. In my demand letter, I made a pretty sizeable request that included compensation for my time and frustration. Once it hit their legal department, they cut me a check - no questions asked. It was far cheaper to settle with me than to send their legal team to defend them in the arbitration.
    • I never thought of looking at it on multiple purchases like you said.  Yes, the extended may help me on 1 or 2 items but not the other 5 or 6.
    • Day 84 - Forgot to post yesterday, but I did some more chipping/pitching.    Back/neck were feeling better today, so I did a much overdue Stack session. 
    • Wordle 1,013 4/6 ⬛⬛🟩🟨⬛ 🟩⬛🟩⬛🟨 🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...