|
Pick your winners! This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Bills |
|
49 | 30.25% |
| Colts |
|
7 | 4.32% |
| Saints |
|
30 | 18.52% |
| Bears |
|
18 | 11.11% |
| WTF |
|
32 | 19.75% |
| Buccs |
|
26 | 16.05% |
| Total: | 71 votes | ||
|
Cant out pizza the hut hut hike up the middle on a 2pt try
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 17:41 |
|
|
FAILURE
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:37
|
|
|
Oh my god, the Colts doing that stupid loving 2 point attempt instead of just kicking the goddamn extra point is going to gently caress over my bet for this game ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh life is cruel
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:37
|
|
|
Did glasses break his glasses?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:37
|
|
|
dont gotta be a rabbit scientist to know that was stupid
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:37
|
|
|
Hmmmm I mean, it’s not like the Bills already demonstrated the ability to stop them at the one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:37
|
|
|
That was weird. Our run D is okay if we can sell out on it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:37
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Who wrote the white paper on going for 2 when down 14 and scoring? Supposedly the math says you're very likely to get it at least once if you go for 2 twice in a row. I actually like the aggressiveness there from the 1. Not a great play call though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:37
|
|
|
Codependent Poster posted:Why go for 2 I would trade his rear end for some sweet as Cauldwell manakin action.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:37
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Somebody did a statistical analysis that said you're more likely to win going for 2 in that situation. Seen it a lot in college this year ah here it is https://predictivefootball.com/late-and-trailing-by-14-points-always-go-for-2-after-a-touchdown/
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:37
|
|
|
Oh hey the poop in a box commercials are back.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
Buffalo were 27th worst at the 2pt conversion defence in the regular season so they stepped up at the right time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Somebody did a statistical analysis that said you're more likely to win going for 2 in that situation. Seen it a lot in college this year It has to do with when your down by 6 it is less likely to get to a tie where overtime is a crap shoot at best. When you have that opportunity you play to win and so your more likely to
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
Bills need to score
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
colts lose by 4
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
Just popping in to say lmao at the Colts. -Signed, a Vikings fan. That’s right your team did something so stupid I can lol from that lowly position
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:ah here it is Get those numbers outta here. Gut check and sight test only
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
Screaming at tv, buffalo bill did it!!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
Wait I forget, would the one point have stood if they rejected the penalty?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Somebody did a statistical analysis that said you're more likely to win going for 2 in that situation. Seen it a lot in college this year I guess that makes sense, but it means you need a 2 to tie then
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
The Puppy Bowl posted:Supposedly the math says you're very likely to get it at least once if you go for 2 twice in a row. I actually like the aggressiveness there from the 1. Not a great play call though. Yeah, it's this. Advanced stats things. If you get it, you can go for the win the next touchdown without worry. If you DON'T get it, you still have a chance to get it again. It's a specific when down 14 points thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
Ah gently caress I just realized how loving funny it is they’re plugging this Silence of the Lambs series during a Buffalo Bills game
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
I'm watching this game on TSN which is a Canadian network and these Harvey's burger commercials are making me miss them and be all nostalgic. I miss them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
sweet thursday posted:Get those numbers outta here. Gut check and sight test only They should run the dang ball
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
sweet thursday posted:Get those numbers outta here. Gut check and sight test only Z-test??? The only test that matters is a test of will!
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
Hazo posted:Ah gently caress I just realized how loving funny it is they’re plugging this Silence of the Lambs series during a Buffalo Bills game It puts the lotion on the skin or Josh Allen throws it again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
Always go for 2 down 14 with a lot of time left
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
man I can't stand charles davis
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:ah here it is Oh, that's cool. Okay Reich, keep on shining on you crazy guy (except the bad challenge)
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:40
|
|
|
AndrewP posted:man I can't stand charles davis Yeah he’s bad
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:40
|
|
|
just noticed INDY used 2 time outs already? wtf?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:40
|
|
|
Charles Davis' commentary sounds like generic Madden commentary
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:40
|
|
|
I hate when that play works
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:40
|
|
|
I think going for it there was fine but what on earth was that play call.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:41
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:just noticed INDY used 2 time outs already? wtf? stop a delay of game (dumb) awful challenge (double dumb)
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:41
|
|
|
AndrewP posted:man I can't stand charles davis I switched to the spanish commentary the moment I heard that platitude robot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:41
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:just noticed INDY used 2 time outs already? wtf? Used one to save Phil from delay of game. Used one on a dumb challenge.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:41
|
|
|
Tom Sellout posted:Always go for 2 down 14 with a lot of time left Probably helps that the Bills would struggle to eat up clock. Might also help if the Colts had more than one timeout.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:41
|
|
|
Numbers change all the time. There are too many of them
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 17:41 |
|
|
flicking piss missiles everywhere
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 21:41
|
|
