Andy
-
Posts
37,265 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Andy
-
Certainly 1 is at least true in part. Evan Drellich tweeted yesterday that MLB did not make any kind of counter-offer yesterday even though they said earlier this week that they would.
-
Given that a 14 team playoff was and is on the table I can categorically state that 12 is not the worst. It's not good by any means but it's not the worst.
-
Guess what 32 idiots who own NFL team did this offseason...
Andy replied to Derwood's topic in Other Sports
Like 3 minutes later reports started pouring in that they picked the Rams OC, but I'm sure that was just a coincidence -
There's some Matt Rhule smoke out there. That would probably be the safest move. (I actually still like Rhule, or at least want to like him, but that would also kinda solve a problem for my pro team.) Beyond him it's a big question mark.
-
Joe Schad reporting it was Brady, not Watson, that Ross was trying to arrange a meeting with, so another swing and a miss for me
-
was dusty really fired/let go from the giants or did his contract expire and they didn't re-sign him? feel like those are two different things. He was technically not renewed, although it seems reasonable to assume he'd have stayed in SF if they'd wanted him to.
-
It has to be Watson, it's been heavily reported that the Dolphins ownership wanted him and Flores wanted no part of it. Ownership also wanted Tua when others wanted Justin Herbert.
-
I'm getting extremely sick of all these proposals offering advantages to "small-market" teams when everyone is treating the CBT like a salary cap anyway so the big-market teams (and really, I mean big-market fan bases) aren't really getting any of the advantages they're supposed to be getting by being big-market teams.
-
I'm guessing this person probably threw down 20 bones on a whole bunch of different potential scores, but still, insane.
-
His challenge on that spot early in the 3rd quarter was breathtakingly stupid, as was the timeout he had to piss away because he couldn't get the play in a little later. Luckily for him it didn't matter, but between this game and Belichick eating his lunch in the Super Bowl a few years back I can't say I'm super impressed with him.
-
Oh God here we go again
-
If Clemens isn't getting votes because he's (allegedly) a child rapist, that's one thing, but as I mentioned above, Omar Vizquel getting more votes than Sammy Sosa would seem to imply that actual crime doesn't matter to the voters nearly as much as steroid use does.
-
My point isn't that the coin toss winner doesn't have any advantage at all. My point is that no overtime system is going to create the perfect 50/50 split of outcomes people seem to want out of this. And college football overtime, the system many people are pointing to as, at minimum, a terrific starting point for an NFL system, has a win rate by the coin toss winner that's pretty damn close to the same as the NFL overtime system. And that's because the team that goes on offense 2nd has the advantage of knowing what's needed to win/tie. A lot like baseball teams batting last have an advantage. But again, you are cherry-picking for your argument. That "similar gap" (which is still only 8%) only exists for DECISIVE overtime college periods. The team that wins the initial coin toss in college games only goes on to win the game 50.94% of the time. College rules are much more fair, and it isn't even close. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frai.2020.00061/full Well, well-put. I concede I did not realize those stats only applied to decisive overtime periods, as where I'd read that didn't mention it. I still think there's more cyber-ink spilled on the issue than it deserves, but your point is taken.
-
So it's your position that a 6.6% difference in who wins an NFL overtime game with a sample size of 65 games or whatever it is is entirely due to the coin toss? That's your take? 1) You don't seem to know what statistical significance is. 2) You're omitting 11 games from your already small sample size that make the "gap" significantly greater. The "gap" is actually 11%. If you throw out the ties (which can't happen in the playoffs) the "gap" increases to 13%. 3) The team that wins the coin toss has been a -130 favorite. If you don't think that's "statistically significant" then you and I can make a bet from here on forward. I'll back the coin toss winner. I'll give you +110. What do you say? My point isn't that the coin toss winner doesn't have any advantage at all. My point is that no overtime system is going to create the perfect 50/50 split of outcomes people seem to want out of this. And college football overtime, the system many people are pointing to as, at minimum, a terrific starting point for an NFL system, has a win rate by the coin toss winner that's pretty damn close to the same as the NFL overtime system.
-
Just under 55 percent of college football overtime games are won by the coin-toss winner, higher than NFL regular season. Does that need to be stripped to its roots too? I'm just trying to figure out what the acceptable percentage is.
-
Lol So it's your position that a 6.6% difference in who wins an NFL overtime game with a sample size of 65 games or whatever it is is entirely due to the coin toss? That's your take?
-
He got fewer votes than Omar Vizquel, so I guess domestic abuse and sexual harassment are less problematic than steroid use.
-
I'm bringing this back up since you referenced it a second time. It may be technically true that the coin toss winner team wins exactly half the time if you take out the playoff numbers and include the ties as "non-wins", but it's pretty misleading. Because if you do exactly the same for the non-coin toss winner teams, the non-coin toss winner teams only win 43.4% of the time even when taking out the playoff numbers (with the other 6.7% being those ties). That's still a pretty healthy advantage for the coin toss winner. I don't consider 50-43.4 a statistically significant difference. There are a million potential reasons for that. If the end goal is an OT that produces an exact 50/50 split, good luck. Your best chance for that is probably literally deciding it with a coin toss.
-
The fact that we're still a few weeks from the original ST report date and there's already been movement (albeit minor) strikes me as a good sign.
-
That's something that will be figured out when they're closer to a deal, but I'd read the opposite and that it's unlikely to continue, at least in the 10th inning. I think the last thing I saw was that it might happen later than the 10th inning. I think both that and the 7-inning doubleheaders (also said to not be continuing) are abominations, but if forced to only eliminate one I think I'd eliminate the doubleheaders.
-
Teams that win the coinflip in playoff OT are 10-1. Again, regular-season results, with a much bigger sample size, are that the coin-flip winner wins exactly half the time.
-
Early reports are the players dropped their push to get players to free agency before 6 years. Seems like they'll focus more on trying to get players to arbitration sooner instead.
-
If that first number includes the playoffs, interestingly enough, that means in the regular season it's 76-66-10, or the coin-toss winner wins the game exactly half the time.
-
I think the OT rules are fine as is and this is all a tempest in a teapot, but the best suggestion I've seen so far was to not change anything except the first team can only walk it off with 8 points instead of 6. Then they have to weigh the 2-point conversion against the possibility of losing if the other team scores a TD too, and that gives the defense another chance to not fail and extend the game.
-
I don't think the FCC can do anything in this case. They don't regulate profanities on cable. People can file complaints, but the FCC will just toss them. I thought you can only say so much before 9 or 10 PM, then it’s more free reign That's correct, but only over the air. The FCC has no jurisdiction on cable. To whatever extent cable networks limit profanities and any other obscene material, it's only because they want to.
