2016 NFL predicition thread

[Joe M 2012 2SS]

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

You must be asleep cause your dreaming!!
Dreaming of, ohhh, two pass attempts!!
You do realize that a sure sign of losing an argument is when one side begins loseing there composer and start calling the other person names. You've been doing that for the last three days now.... Looks like you and the Falcons have a lot in common!

I haven't lost my composure.

I simply stated mathematical fact, and your reply was false statistics, and you don't even know what the names of the field goal kickers were!

You can't even understand simple mathematical principles, you post words like hypothetical, which means without sufficient proof, I have provided the proof, and you provide incorrect statistics!!!

And now your going to cry because I called you what you are, and busted you in a lie?

Guess what? Not only do I know this....but anyone who took math and english in the 5th grade does now too!!!!!

Shanahan even admitted that he blew playing the proper percentages.

But not Kenny ... oh no...... he posts false statistics, uses words he doesn't understand, and quotes names of people, when he doesn't even know their names, and states that playing a 98% odds play was the incorrect thing to do!!!!

Please do post something else dumb... this is so much fun I can't hardly stand it!!!!!

[mickss]

@Joe M 2012 2SS & Kenny Camaro

In the beginning you both made valid points but now you both have managed to turn it into a personal piss fight, give up the ghost and move on for crying out loud, neither one of you needs to be right or get the last word in!!!

[Kenny Camaro]

Here's what's right, you can't say your right when what you claim never happened. It's all hope and wishes. Did I spell that right? 98% is not one hundred percent no matter how much you want it to be. Live in your 5th grade world. Lose arguments and desend into name calling, cause that's what 5th graders do. Maybe the next time the Falcons play a big game they will execute better, until then they shall be the biggest chokers in the history of the Super Bowl. Better luck next time. Oh I forgot, have a nice day!!

[Joe M 2012 2SS]

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

Here's what's right, you can't say your right when what you claim never happened. It's all hope and wishes. Did I spell that right? 98% is not one hundred percent no matter how much you want it to be. Live in your 5th grade world. Lose arguments and deseng into name calling, cause that's what 5th graders do. Maybe the next time the Falcons play a big game they will execute better, until then they shall be the biggest chokers in the history of the Super Bowl. Better luck next time.

Here is what is right. The Falcons on two different times in the fourth quarter had a 99.6%, and a 98.1% chance of winning the game, if they just ran the ball.

This is undeniable, irrefutable, mathematical fact.

I completely accept the outcome of the game, however, Atlanta made the opportunity for the comeback possible by Shanahan's ridiculous calls in these two situations.

You have proven in your posts that you know nothing about mathematical fact, your replies are completely incorrect, and you cry when you get busted.

Here is what you posted.

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

I bet that Tom Brady wins his fifth Super Bowl. I did and I won. Beat the spread and the over. And hit the third quarter square. Ahhh, what's the percentage on that? By the way I hit the third quarter square because Gostenkowski missed his first extra point of the year, yes he was 100%, l believe that is higher than Matt Bahrs FG percentage that your whole senario hinges on. There's proof of your hypothetical conjecture not being entirely accepted as a factual actuality. Have a nice day!

All of these things you posted are FALSE.

1) Gostkowski was not perfect on the year for extra points, this was not his first miss. He had 2 prior misses.

2) Bryant only missed one extra point all year.

3) Bryant's field goal percentage was higher for the year then Gostkowsi's. 91.9% to 84.4%

4) You claim that I am posting hypothetical conjecture, when what I have posted is absolutely accurate, the false statements were made by you.

5) You don't even know what the names of the players are.

6) By doing this, you prove yourself to be an idiot, and then cry when I call you out on it?

Never once have I stated the PATS didn't play great in the 4th quarter. That is not in question.

What is in question is what ATL did to give them the opportunity to comeback. Proven by mathematical fact. You don't opt to do something different when your a 99.6% and a 98.1% favorite to win.

Anyone with a nickel's worth of sense knows this.

[3 SS's]

Originally Posted by Joe M 2012 2SS

I'm going to make this really simple for you. With 17 minutes left in the game ATL has a 25 point lead. They are going to get the ball 5 more times before the conclusion of regualtion.

If they run the ball 15 times, and take 40 seconds off the clock each play, even if they don't get ONE first down, all they need to do is not turn the ball over. ATL had the fewest fumbles by running backs in the league this year. They know how to hold on to the ball. This runs 10 minutes and 40 seconds off the clock. ATL actually only had six minutes and 50 seconds of runoff.

Atlanta only ran 4 running plays during this time frame. They averaged 5 yards per carry during the game. If they run the ball they win 99% of the time.

On the PATS final drive during regulation, they started with 3 minutes and 51 seconds. Had ATL managed the clock, the ball and the game properly, by running the ball, NE gets it back with 1 second.

The PATS played excellent in the fourth quarter, but ATL gave them the opportunity to tie the game by ridiculous play calls and poor clock management.

Originally Posted by Joe M 2012 2SS

Yes they burn 10 minutes off the clock instead of 6.5. NE doesn't have time to score the touchdown that ties the game.



ATL didn't have a holding call on a run the ENTIRE game. Do you think the punt from their 36 (if they don't make the 3rd and 1 by running, instead of throwing the ball) is going backwards 9 yards to the 25?

You are delusional thinking that NE won only because of their play in the 4th quarter.

While it was fantastic, they needed Shanahan to make several bad decisions as well, which he did.

Had ATL just played the percentages (run down the clock), they were a 99% favorite to win. This is not conjecture, it's 100% fact.

WORST PLAY CALLING EVER

actually they had at least one holding call on a run

what was their yards per carry after they took the lead at 28- 3 , I'll save you the time......1.4, 14 plays after being up 28-3 , 9 passes gaining 75 yds, 5 runs for 7 yds , which one was a gain of 8 and the rest were either zero or losses,and a holding call

[Joe M 2012 2SS]

Originally Posted by 3 SS's

actually they had at least one holding call on a run

what was their yards per carry after they took the lead at 28- 3 , I'll save you the time......1.4, 14 plays after being up 28-3 , 9 passes gaining 75 yds, 5 runs for 7 yds , which one was a gain of 8 and the rest were either zero or losses,and a holding call

They did not have a holding call on a run. They had four holding calls on passes.

The yards gained per run in the fourth quarter makes no difference, what does make a difference is the time they could have taken off the clock running the ball.

With 3rd and 1 they ran a pass, which resulted in a blindsided sack and a fumble. At this point there was 8:31 on the clock at the beginning of the play.

A running play that nets no yards still allows them to run 40 more seconds off the clock, add 8 more for the average hang time of the punt, and doesn't give NE the ball on the ATL 25, more like the NE 25, which also requires NE to burn much more clock to score a touchdown then it did from the ATL 25.

Then with 1st and 10 at the NE 22, they only manage to run 50 seconds off the clock, where they could have easily run 120 seconds off by running the ball 3 times.

Even if Bryant misses the FG, which is highly unlikely, NE doesn't get the ball with 3:50 to complete the score that ties the game. NE gets it with less than a minute to score a touchdown, even if they use their 2 timeouts. Their final drive in regulation took 2 minutes and 50 seconds.

NE played great in the fourth, but realize that ATL did the worst possible thing they could by not burning the clock, and calling passing plays when they should have called runs, and not scoring points when they were in position to do so by playing smart.

This is the only point I've been trying to make. It's backed up by mathematical fact. Does it mean 100% that ATL wins? No, I never said that.

What it does do is give them the best chances based upon two very easy calls to make, to win the game, both are 98% or more.

Shanahan instead went with high risk plays that cost ATL not only a turnover, but didn't take any time off the clock as well.

[Kenny Camaro]

Originally Posted by Joe M 2012 2SS

Here is what is right. The Falcons on two different times in the fourth quarter had a 99.6%, and a 98.1% chance of winning the game, if they just ran the ball.

This is undeniable, irrefutable, mathematical fact.

I completely accept the outcome of the game, however, Atlanta made the opportunity for the comeback possible by Shanahan's ridiculous calls in these two situations.

You have proven in your posts that you know nothing about mathematical fact, your replies are completely incorrect, and you cry when you get busted.

Here is what you posted.



All of these things you posted are FALSE.

1) Gostkowski was not perfect on the year for extra points, this was not his first miss. He had 2 prior misses.

2) Bryant only missed one extra point all year.

3) Bryant's field goal percentage was higher for the year then Gostkowsi's. 91.9% to 84.4%

4) You claim that I am posting hypothetical conjecture, when what I have posted is absolutely accurate, the false statements were made by you.

5) You don't even know what the names of the players are.

6) By doing this, you prove yourself to be an idiot, and then cry when I call you out on it?

Never once have I stated the PATS didn't play great in the 4th quarter. That is not in question.

What is in question is what ATL did to give them the opportunity to comeback. Proven by mathematical fact. You don't opt to do something different when your a 99.6% and a 98.1% favorite to win.

Anyone with a nickel's worth of sense knows this.

Jeez, ok. When you get a butt hurt, you just won't let it go, will you.
1. Well, the point was he missed a shorter kick than the one you desperately were hoping for in the fourth quarter.
2. So, irrelevant.
3. Again, irrelevant.
4. The conjecture is that if "x" happens, run the ball, then "y" will come to pass, less time for the pats, field goal attempt, Falcons win the game. No buddy cares about your anal grasp on your stated percentages. Less time, Pats had time outs remaining. Field goal attempt, maybe, attempt does not equal success.Falcons winning the game, all three are just your hypothetical conjecture of what you wished would of happened. Do you understand now?
5. I know the players names, I did not spell them correctly at 4am. In the morning as I was in a rush to leave for work. I will say that I indeed mixed up Bahr and Bryant
6. A sure sign of someone losing an argument is calling of names by the person coming up short in the discussion, proof in line 6. Another is trying to change the parameters of the dispute, like bringing up spelling, claiming the other person is lying, and crying. So there is your M.O. Spelled out for you.

Finally, an intelligent, logical statement- the Patriots did play a great fourth quarter.

What Atalanta did to give them the opportunity to come back was a complete collapse of the defense in the final twenty minutes of the game, allowing five consecutive scores, not two plays on offense. Everybody but YOU sees that. Again, have a nice day!

[3 SS's]

Originally Posted by Joe M 2012 2SS

They did not have a holding call on a run. They had four holding calls on passes.

The yards gained per run in the fourth quarter makes no difference, what does make a difference is the time they could have taken off the clock running the ball.

With 3rd and 1 they ran a pass, which resulted in a blindsided sack and a fumble. At this point there was 8:31 on the clock at the beginning of the play.

A running play that nets no yards still allows them to run 40 more seconds off the clock, add 8 more for the average hang time of the punt, and doesn't give NE the ball on the ATL 25, more like the NE 25, which also requires NE to burn much more clock to score a touchdown then it did from the ATL 25.

Then with 1st and 10 at the NE 22, they only manage to run 50 seconds off the clock, where they could have easily run 120 seconds off by running the ball 3 times.

Even if Bryant misses the FG, which is highly unlikely, NE doesn't get the ball with 3:50 to complete the score that ties the game. NE gets it with less than a minute to score a touchdown, even if they use their 2 timeouts. Their final drive in regulation took 2 minutes and 50 seconds.

NE played great in the fourth, but realize that ATL did the worst possible thing they could by not burning the clock, and calling passing plays when they should have called runs, and not scoring points when they were in position to do so by playing smart.

This is the only point I've been trying to make. It's backed up by mathematical fact. Does it mean 100% that ATL wins? No, I never said that.

What it does do is give them the best chances based upon two very easy calls to make, to win the game, both are 98% or more.

Shanahan instead went with high risk plays that cost ATL not only a turnover, but didn't take any time off the clock as well.

Yes they did, at least one, I'll check 1st half for you later......and the yds do matter, they go backwards, get MORE holding calls on runs,they start to give better field position to the Pats,you fail to recocgnize Pats were also playing the clock, they were not in full two minute hurry up and could have played faster if needed.How many games have you seen a team throttle down only to lose?

oh, what's that?????a flag ?

[Royal Tiger]

I can't believe 3 pages later no one wants to talk about the Chicago Cubs like curse I bestowed upon the Falcons and Eagles.

[Kenny Camaro]

Good goin R.T. Think it will last over 100 years? Lol.

[Kenny Camaro]

Originally Posted by 3 SS's

Yes they did, at least one, I'll check 1st half for you later......and the yds do matter, they go backwards, get MORE holding calls on runs,they start to give better field position to the Pats,you fail to recocgnize Pats were also playing the clock, they were not in full two minute hurry up and could have played faster if needed.How many games have you seen a team throttle down only to lose?

oh, what's that?????a flag ?

Wow! Visual proof of an actual holding call on a running play. Another example of poor execution by the Atlanta Falcons. WOW, what's the odds, or should I say percentage of that happening?

[Joe M 2012 2SS]

Originally Posted by 3 SS's

Yes they did, at least one, I'll check 1st half for you later......and the yds do matter, they go backwards, get MORE holding calls on runs,they start to give better field position to the Pats,you fail to recocgnize Pats were also playing the clock, they were not in full two minute hurry up and could have played faster if needed.How many games have you seen a team throttle down only to lose?

oh, what's that?????a flag ?

OK I missed this play, must have happened when I was in the bathroom.

It has no bearing however upon the fact that ATL was 99.6% and 98.1% in the two plays where Shanahan went against these odds to call a higher risk play.

So ATL had one holding call in 17 plays, That's 5.9%... in the 3 plays where they didn't run the ball instead of pass, this gives them a whopping 1% chance of committing a hold in these 3 plays.

ATL actually averaged 2.3 yards the 2nd half running the ball, but again, this doesn't matter.

What does matter is they elected to go with risky plays, versus a 99.6% and a 98.1% option.

[Joe M 2012 2SS]

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

Jeez, ok. When you get a butt hurt, you just won't let it go, will you.

Not butt hurt at all, just stating the fact that Shanahan made two ridiculous calls, going against a 99.6% and 98.1% better option,

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

1. Well, the point was he missed a shorter kick than the one you desperately were hoping for in the fourth quarter.

No, I'll quote what you said.

"Gostenkowski missed his first extra point of the year, yes he was 100%, l believe that is higher than Matt Bahrs FG percentage that your whole senario hinges on. There's proof of your hypothetical conjecture not being entirely accepted as a factual actuality."

Gostkowski was not perfect on the year he had missed 2 prior to this miss.
Your comparing FG percentage to XP percentage. These are two TOTALLY different things!

You don't even know the name of the ATL kicker Matt Bryant and his actual stats for the year 34 of 37 on FG for 91.9% He went to the Pro Bowl because he was the best kicker in the NFC for the entire YEAR.

You claim this is proof, when what it is actually proof of, is the fact that you don't know the difference between a FG and an XP, and you have no idea how fantastic of a season Bryant had! "Hypothetical conjecture" is defined as not backed up by proof. The statements YOU made are the ones not backed up by proof!

Furthermore, Bryant's FG % has nothing to do with the fact that ATL SQUANDERED over 2 minutes and 40 seconds of clock they could have run off by RUNNING THE BALL!!!!!

You don't even have a CLUE!!

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

2. So, irrelevant.

Your entire statement in this post is completely false, yes I agree it's irrelevant. It's not true

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

3. Again, irrelevant.

Another word in the English language that you use while not understanding it's definition.

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

4. The conjecture is that if "x" happens, run the ball, then "y" will come to pass, less time for the pats, field goal attempt, Falcons win the game. No buddy cares about your anal grasp on your stated percentages. Less time, Pats had time outs remaining. Field goal attempt, maybe, attempt does not equal success.Falcons winning the game, all three are just your hypothetical conjecture of what you wished would of happened. Do you understand now?

The point I've tried to make throughout this whole hiatus with you, that you can't grasp, is ATL on two different occasions had a 99.6% and 98.1% chance of winning the game in the fourth quarter.

Shanahan instead opted to go with a much higher risk play.

It's a simple known fact that if you run the ball, you run time off the clock, unless you run out of bounds. Somehow you don't comprehend this.

When NE got the ball back with 3:50 seconds for the final drive that tied the game it took 2:50.

ATL squandered 2 minutes and 40 seconds of clock that they could have burned, just by not running the ball! Even if they don't make the 3rd and 1, they still punt and NE doesn't have the ball at the ATL 25. It took NE 2:28 to go 5 plays to score a touchdown.

Based upon ATL's average net punt, NE gets the ball at their own 25 yard line. NE averaged 5.9 yards per play in this game. To go 50 more yards takes them 8.5 plays, which takes MORE time off the clock.

Even if NE burns their timeouts, and Bryant misses the FG, which odds based upon his stats highly contradict. NE doesn't have 3:50 seconds for their final drive, they have less then a minute.

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

5. I know the players names, I did not spell them correctly at 4am. In the morning as I was in a rush to leave for work. I will say that I indeed mixed up Bahr and Bryant.

Not only do you not know who Matt Bryant is, you have no idea of how fantastic of a season he had.

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

6. A sure sign of someone losing an argument is calling of names by the person coming up short in the discussion, proof in line 6. Another is trying to change the parameters of the dispute, like bringing up spelling, claiming the other person is lying, and crying. So there is your M.O. Spelled out for you.

I PROVED your lie, proved you don't understand math, proved you didn't know the name of the ATL kicker, or his stats, proved you don't have a clue what hypothetical conjecture means. If the shoe fits, WEAR IT!

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

Finally, an intelligent, logical statement- the Patriots did play a great fourth quarter.

I never once stated the PATS didn't. What I simply stated is the undeniable, irrefutable fact that Shanahan blew two gigantic calls where he had his team as a 99.6% and 98.1% favorite.

Originally Posted by Kenny Camaro

What Atalanta did to give them the opportunity to come back was a complete collapse of the defense in the final twenty minutes of the game, allowing five consecutive scores, not two plays on offense. Everybody but YOU sees that. Again, have a nice day!

What you don't understand is after the FG the PATS made that took 5:07 off the clock, this was a HUGE win for the ATL defense. It put their offense in the position at 99.6% to win with 3rd and 1 with 8:31 left on the clock.

Instead of going with these odds, Shanahan went with a much higher risk play.
YOU DON"T THROW AWAY A 99.6% CHANCE TO WIN THE GAME!!!

[Kenny Camaro]

Blah, Blah, Blah, from butt hurt incorporated.