Careless
-
Posts
20,912 -
Joined
-
Last visited
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
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Careless
-
His English is reasonable
-
way to blow it, Tigers
-
This makes me glad the Cubs have been out of it for long enough that I can enjoy this
-
Did he just call that one a base hit?
-
They haven't come close to hitting one one
-
This makes a lot more sense after the edit
-
How is that sad? That's badass. Did you see that swing? edit: but hey, good job
-
They're pretty excited
-
It should be a lot lower of a chance than that. Actually, it's a bit over 1/6, given the possibly bad stats (40% chance of one succeeding) I saw Yes but I'm assuming that 1/6 is for a simple 1 time try. Getting a 2-pt conversion two times in a row multiplys the chances to a much less likely ratio. I don't remember the exact formula but it is not simply the percentage of all the 2-pt tries added up. There is some sort of formula that multiples it for when it has to happen twice in a row. an individual try has a 40% chance of succeeding. .4 squared is .16. .16*6=.96, so it's a little more than 1/6
-
Hey vikings, pull a steelers and don't expect the onside kick
-
It should be a lot lower of a chance than that. Actually, it's a bit over 1/6, given the possibly bad stats (40% chance of one succeeding) I saw
-
it's basically a 1 in 7 shot of completing 2 2 point conversions.
-
no you're giving them the ball back when you're running out of time so you think it's better to give them the ball at the 1 Easier to score 3 times with almost all that clock left than probably have to score 3 times with significantly less clock time
-
no you're giving them the ball back when you're running out of time
-
dumbest challenge ever
-
Not really. They had the right idea and a better chance to win the game if they focused on stopping #28 compared to Favre. I'm not sure, focus on Favre and you might wind up with interceptions. A lot more likely than getting fumbles out of Peterson. Peterson is more dangerous, but Favre is more exploitable
-
wow, as close to a touchback as you can get
-
So the Packers couldn't stop Benson but shut down Peterson
-
The left side of the Packers line has been terrible all season, right?
-
Hey, he actually threw the ball away! they never think to do that, good job!
-
He's averaging 10 yards per pass attempt One yard away from 5 guys with 20+ yard receptions
-
I think Grossman would be very good in those circumstances. Good O-line and RB and you can't make him crap his pants with constant blitzes
-
Good job by the ref to get the call right but to allow them the chance to recover and challenge
-
How does that not get a booth review?
-
what a stupid decision. You just knocked yourself out of field goal range and didn't run the time off the clock