Recent Posts

It's pretty easy to look at every scenario after a game and punch in the numbers and give the probability. These coaches are facing a play clock,  are not sitting in front of a computer, etc. If you think McDaniel had any clue there was a 3.5% sway either way when he made his decision I think you are delusional. I may be naive.

Pedophiles are, by definition, attracted to *prepubescent* children. Someone attracted to 15-year-olds is not a pedophile (on that basis). Having a sexual relationship with someone that young, however, does make you a rapist.

And a predator as well.

[If you assume going for it will definitely be successful, the math would say to go for it 100% of the time, no matter where on the field you are!]

Yes it does make sense.  Those percentages factors assume both scoring opportunities were successful.

The actual percentages (that McDaniel would have been looking at) absolutely take into account the expected success rate of the plays in question.  Otherwise, the percentages would be meaningless!

Like, you can't meaningfully evaluate the difference in winning percentage between going for it on 4th and 4 at your opponent's 20 vs. kicking a field goal if you are baking automatic success into the outcome.  If you assume going for it will definitely be successful, the math would say to go for it 100% of the time, no matter where on the field you are!

[If it's a 90.89% win to kick, then it would be a 94.39% to go for it. Higher percentage is higher percentage. "It's not worth the risk" doesn't make sense, in a vacuum, at least.]

This doesn't make mathematical sense.

If it's a 90.89% win to kick, then it would be a 94.39% to go for it.  Higher percentage is higher percentage.  "It's not worth the risk" doesn't make sense, in a vacuum, at least.

To Spider's point, there are things like scapegoats and optics, so maybe you kick for that reason.  But in general, you take the likelier chance of success when given the choice.

Yes it does make sense.  Those percentages factors assume both scoring opportunities were successful.  However, we all know that kicking a FG from 20 yards has a success rate of over 90%, whereas the success rate of scoring a TD from that location is much lower.

Whether we call it "pedophilia" or "technically, it's ephebophilia," we are still talking about child sex trafficking.

Finally  ... we agree on something. Hahaha It's freaking disgusting and inexcusable either way

Repeating bullshit multiple times doesn't make it true. 

No, repetition doesn't make something true.  Other things do.

Once again I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.

Repeating bullshit multiple times doesn't make it true. 

[one locker room celebration]

The thread has been about one locker room celebration, which you extrapolate into various conclusions about "team culture" and then directly link to a team's ability to win.
You citing some tweets two pages in doesn't change that.

Once again I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.

15-year-old children are completely unable to legally consent to a sexual relationship with any adult in every state (with the exception of "close-age-relationships" in some states).

This is one of those topics where the internet is the absolute worst place to try and inject some sense of reason. It's also one of those topics where the word at the center of it has come to mean something else to a lot of people. Pedophiles are, by definition, attracted to *prepubescent* children. Someone attracted to 15-year-olds is not a pedophile (on that basis). Having a sexual relationship with someone that young, however, does make you a rapist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nu6C2KL_S9o

[one locker room celebration]

The thread has been about one locker room celebration, which you extrapolate into various conclusions about "team culture" and then directly link to a team's ability to win.
You citing some tweets two pages in doesn't change that.