bukie

I'm trying to figure out why your AFC picks are almost exactly like mine lol. But really I'm trying to figure out how one could win by 5 in an OT game. The only way I can see that happening is if the Packers kick a FG on their first possession of OT, then on the Falcons chance to possess the ball they get sacked in the end zone for a safety. Is that what you intended? Yes, because I thought it'd be funny. Plus, it's the only somewhat feasible way that a team could score twice in OT.

My picks: Patriots 36, Jets 26 Ravens 23, Steelers 20 Packers 33, Falcons 28, OT Bears 27, Seahawks 13

Updated FO playoff odds: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds Updated DVOA: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings/2011/week-18-dvoa-ratings

Illinois' insane shooting: http://www.basketballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=613

21. Kansas City 22. Indianapolis 23. Philadelphia 24. New Orleans Seahawks just torpedoing their draft position the last two weeks. ;)

As long as it's not a repeat of the Seattle game. Or the New England game.

So...decent effort so far.

Let's just get to the NFC championship.

Thanks for the info and that's good to hear. I figured Hendry must have seen something that he really loved in Garza and was hoping he wasn't just looking at a good ERA/WHIP and assuming he'd continue to be good. Maybe he also hits well with runners in scoring position.

It would be a little funny if the Seahawks were the only home team that won this weekend.

Who told the refs that Derrick Rose was actually Dwyane Wade?

The odd thing here is, the Seahawks are probably also rooting hard for the Packers, because they already beat the Bears in Chicago this year. Plus, they'd have a shot at a home game for the NFC championship.

Did this also finish up some kind of deal for Carlos Pena, or was all that just for Garza? :)

162 games vs 16 games. wouldn't that even further my point? it's intuitively obvious from even the most basic understanding of statistics that you're going to have a better picture of the truth from a sample of 162 than 16, but even then we realize the sample of 162 isn't ideal, because there's so much luck and chance involved in close wins, and that's precisely why we accept pythagorean record as an improvement upon old-fashioned W-L. to look at two teams and say "this one's better 'cause they won one more game" is so patently ludicrous. Similarly, it's patently ludicrous to use solely point differential to determine who's a good team and who's not. If my quick math is correct, GB's point differential between just Dallas, Minnesota (in Minny), SF and Buffalo is +111. The point differential in the other 12 games they played this season...+37. That's cherry picked of course, but it's simply to point out that they had a few huge blowouts against some bad teams...and the rest of their games were mostly close games. So that differential is misleading. San Diego has a +119 point differential and they didn't make the playoffs. How good do you think they are? Better than most, just terribly coached. By every advanced metric out there, Green Bay is, if not the best team in the NFC, one of the 2-3 best. Doesn't mean they're destined to win the NFC, but they shouldn't be taken lightly because they lost 6 games.

One more thing about last night: Weber deserves a lot of credit for having the team extremely well prepared to deal with NW's offense and defense. They played like they knew exactly how to handle every situation NW threw at them on both ends, aside from the turnovers.

Next, they have to win in Happy Valley, because after that, the schedule takes a turn for the hellish for the rest of the year: at Wisconsin vs MSU vs OSU at IU vs PSU at NW at MINN vs PU vs MICH at MSU at OSU vs IA at PU vs IU

Tonight's game: unconscious offensively, great defensively. Still allowed 22 more shots than they took, despite rebounding 31 of 37 offensive misses. Turnovers are a huge problem, and are going to screw them one of these days when they stop hitting 2 of every 3 shots. In 3 conference games, Illinois is shooting 86 for 133, or 64.7%. That's unreal, and likely unsustainable.

As long as Illinois can keep shooting higher from the field than from the line, they'll be fine.

I have no idea, but I figured I'd bump this to the new page because it's interesting. Yes, because the rules state each team must have a chance at possession, and an onside kick (along with a muffed punt, but not a fake punt) constitutes a chance at possession. It's a risky move (because you're basically conceding a FG, forcing you to score on offense to prolong the game), but the payoff is huge.

What's the point of a clock then? Why have it timed at all? Not sure, it's kind of pointless, aside from each team getting an additional timeout after the first OT.

I think the rules are pretty clear cut. There is one scenario I thought about where it can cause confusion though: Say Aaron Rodgers throws an INT to Brian Dawkins in the first possession of OT. Dawkins tries to return it but then fumbles and the Packers recover. The Packers eventually kick a FG. Is the game over? I'm pretty sure, yes. It may not happen at all, but an onside kick to begin OT may cause confusion as well. I heard if a team opens OT by recovering its own onside kick, a FG can win the game because the other team had an opportunity to take possession. This is true, yes.

This is probably the weirdest potential scenario: Let's say the Ravens and Steelers play in the AFC championship, and the game goes to OT. The Ravens orchestrate a 10 minute drive that stalls at the 5, and kick the FG to go up 3. Then, the Steelers respond with a drive that gets into the red zone, but the Ravens sack Big Ben with Pitt out of timeouts, and time runs out. According to the rules, another 15 minutes is put back onto the clock so the Steelers can potentially finish their drive, and in the case of a FG, return the ball to the Ravens, at which point sudden death applies.

Well...he is right there with Sullinger in usage.

Memphis might be the 5th best team in CUSA this year. If Tennessee can't win this, they may go winless in the SEC.

Memphis is not a good basketball team.