https://twitter.com/CockyTomBrady/status/648226613893701632
If this is one of you guys, kudos.
If this is one of you guys, kudos.
drleather2001 said:He also had a gimpy ankle.
If that ankle was fine, and if Gronk's ankle was fine a few years later, the Pats have two more championships.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
Logan Mankins has had a fine career, and was really awesome for the Pats, but it's a real shame that his worst two games as a professional were in the two SBs against the Giants. The second one I'll give him somewhat a pass on as he was playing on a bad knee, but the first one....my God. He was the biggest single reason for the loss. He couldn't do anything with Tuck and the Giants just destroyed the middle of the line.
rodderick said:
Yup. Mankins is lucky the average fan doesn't know the game enough to properly evaluate line play, if he were a skill position player there would be a large portion of the fanbase who would (unfairly) revile him.
DrewDawg said:
If the average fan could properly evaluate line play, it wouldn't then be unfair to revile him (for the game you're talking about) would it?
LOL. Well done.Dick Pole Upside said:Sent from my brother Rich Pole Upside...
This is what stuck out to me as well. Also, I forgot how good of a game Hernandez had in the second Giants Super Bowl. What a dope.Ed Hillel said:I watched this last week. One thing that stood out to me was just how badly the O line was abused in 2007. I remember it being bad, obviously, but with a little more clarity it's way worse than I remembered. I think Brady did about as well as he could have given the circumstances.
I don't. Hope some can dig it up. On mobile so I can't now.drleather2001 said:Remember a couple years ago when there was a thread on here asking whether the game had passed Belichick by?
Once, in a simpler time, it was possible in punditry to fire off a scalding hot take about an athlete -- a take that would later prove to be hastily crafted and perhaps completely, shockingly wrong -- and watch it disappear, more or less, into the ether. In order for it to come back and haunt you (say, a year later), it would require a local busybody marching down to the public library and digging through microfilm for an hour until your foolishness was dragged, mercilessly, back into the light. But even then, there was no way to widely disseminate it, no opportunity to point out to others just how badly that prediction went awry, other than perhaps standing on a street corner, braying like a madman. But now?
The Internet, well ... the Internet is where the game done changed, as kids like to say. And 365 days later, there is much we wish we could erase but can't.
They can edit it later like they did for Mike Reiss' column!Number45forever said:Shocking thing is that ESPN ran that story. I figured the second half of the story would be commentary on how Brady turned things around once he started cheating.
E5 Yaz said:Sorry if this is elsewhere: The Day The Media Buried Brady
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13776027/the-day-buried-patriots-qb-tom-brady-nfl
Number45forever said:Shocking thing is that ESPN ran that story. I figured the second half of the story would be commentary on how Brady turned things around once he started cheating.
There’s a heavy sense of skepticism/paranoia among Patriots fans as to how ESPN, in particular, has covered the team and the various “gates.” As a media watchdog, do you see specific approaches in that coverage that justifies that concern? Could ESPN, for instance, carry out an “agenda” against a team for this long without one member of its staff airing the network’s dirty laundry? – E5 Yaz
Well, there’s evidence of an agenda on ESPN’s part, sure. The skepticism is justified. Most egregiously, they never corrected Chris Mortensen’s erroneous report about 11 of the 12 footballs in the first half of the AFC Championship Game being underinflated by 2 PSI, the story that turned a minor “huh, that’s weird” story into the ridiculous summer-long drama that it became. Then you see how they keep using Bill Polian — a guy with an agenda if there ever was one; I was in the press box once when he was the Colts GM, Welker got hurt, and he blurted, “Break his —– leg!” — to comment on this while Tedy Bruschi was scarcely seen. Or how Mike Reiss’s innocuous piece reacting to the investigative piece connecting Spygate and Deflategate was edited. Or how Simmons was unceremoniously dumped after taking another bull’s-eye shot at Goodell. I don’t think it’s fair to make a blanket statement that ESPN is biased against the Patriots, because there are some very good people who work there who have comported themselves well in this — starting with Reiss, but Adam Schefter too. But it’s very, very clear that the nerve center of the organization feels some obligation to the NFL to protect it as a business partner.
Let’s get this out of the way: It’s extremely improbable that New England will win each of its remaining 13 games.
Yes. Put another way, 4.4% corresponds to a per-game win probability of 78.64%. Of course there are some harder games, so really they must also be saying that some games the pats are extraordinarily unlikely to lose, and most of them have a substantial lopsidedness.drleather2001 said:It does seem high.
I was fiddling around with this thought the other day, and while it's incredibly crude, I came up with:
If we assume that, with the "any given Sunday" factor, the highest winning probability a team can be said to an upcoming game is 80%, then this year's Pats odds would be about 5.5% to run the table. If we bump a single one of those games down to 50%, my calculations say they have a 3.2% chance.
So, 4.4% seems like they really overstated the dominance of this year's team vis a vis the competition.
tims4wins said:Inside the NFL re-runs on NFLN on Wednesday nights, FYI (and a couple more times Thursday-Saturday)
Also, LOL Kyle Williams of Buffalo saying "we got beat by a team last week that we shouldn't have lost to."nattysez said:Thanks for this - I just re-watched it. Two interesting tidbits;
(1) BB was much more rah-rah on the sidelines than you see on most of the 3 Games to Glory films and elsewhere. He's not jacked and pumped, but he is more demonstratively positive than I thought.
(2) He went out of his way to specifically compliment Cannon when he was coming off the field after TDs. Given that Cannon seems to be generally considered as the weak link on the o-line, I found BB's strong praise interesting. It's almost like he knows Cannon needs to improve, so he's trying to use positive reinforcement to help him out.
When you see how they keep using Bill Polian — a guy with an agenda if there ever was one; I was in the press box once when he was the Colts GM, Welker got hurt, and he blurted, “Break his —– leg!” — to comment on this while Tedy Bruschi was scarcely seen.
The PFW In Progress guys, especially Fred Kirsch, have commented on Polian's terrible behavior in the press box for years. Seems like wishing for guys to get hurt was routine.jacklamabe65 said:
This is absolutely stunning. I can't believe more people on the board haven't reacted to this. Wow.
And Ghost got the ST award. Obstructors unite!PC Drunken Friar said:Suck it NFL, Tom Brady Named AFC Offensive Player of the Month
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000546613/article/tom-brady-julio-jones-lead-players-of-the-month
An 11.5 point favorite has around an 80% chance of winning according to the betting markets (imprecise, yes, but just to give a general sense). According to 538 themselves, the Pats were around a 91% favorite over the Jags last week. So they will not be a 90% favorite very often... I am guessing they will not open another game this year -14.Kevin Youkulele said:Yes. Put another way, 4.4% corresponds to a per-game win probability of 78.64%. Of course there are some harder games, so really they must also be saying that some games the pats are extraordinarily unlikely to lose, and most of them have a substantial lopsidedness.
Also, I think 80% as the maximum due to the any given Sunday factor might be low. I haven't done rigorous stats for a while but it seems inconsistent with the frequency of 13 and 14 win seasons, where the 2 or 3 losses were not necessarily flukes. It's probably fine for an average team but that is not what the Pats are. In particular, they do not make nearly as many of the kind of mistakes that could let an otherwise inferior team steal a game.
If you assume that 7 games have a 90% win probability each, then the other 6 have a 52.5% geometric mean win probability. So the 538 number might not be that outlandish.
Kevin Youkulele said:Yes. Put another way, 4.4% corresponds to a per-game win probability of 78.64%. Of course there are some harder games, so really they must also be saying that some games the pats are extraordinarily unlikely to lose, and most of them have a substantial lopsidedness.
Also, I think 80% as the maximum due to the any given Sunday factor might be low. I haven't done rigorous stats for a while but it seems inconsistent with the frequency of 13 and 14 win seasons, where the 2 or 3 losses were not necessarily flukes. It's probably fine for an average team but that is not what the Pats are. In particular, they do not make nearly as many of the kind of mistakes that could let an otherwise inferior team steal a game.
If you assume that 7 games have a 90% win probability each, then the other 6 have a 52.5% geometric mean win probability. So the 538 number might not be that outlandish.
GeorgeCostanza said:Man that Jeff Lynne is talented! Musician and math wiz!
GeorgeCostanza said:Man that Jeff Lynne is talented! Musician and math wiz!
A catch with the ball pressed against the receiver's helmet, just like they drew it up on the white board.....Koufax said:I love that Malcolm Butler's interception was a technicality. What in her mind is real football?
Omar's Wacky Neighbor said:How long has she been your secretary, that you:
just out-of-the-blue started talking football today;
didnt know that her team is the Steelers. (or did you ask her, already knowing the answer).
I would think she might have been a tad more vocal over the past 8 months......