All Activity

I think I would go for it here...one play to end the game and the Lions still need a TD if you don't get it.

The Rams had 1 bad year, in 2022, in which Stafford was injured. They made the playoffs in '23 and '24 - nothing great, but it's disingenuous to make it sound like those were "down" years.

16-11 bills. Steelers get 4 safeties and a fg

Didn't Campbell also lose a playoff game with that stupidity? There is a time and place to go for it. And then there are times when you don't.

Apparently he did not post that to Instagram. Was all made up.

The Democrats’ “Illegal Orders” Video Isn’t About the Law. It’s About Undermining the Military’s Trust in Trump and the Chain of Command. "But we were just trying to educate the troops." By John A. Lucas These six Democrats claim that their now-infamous video is nothing but an innocent effort to remind the troops that they don’t have to obey illegal orders. Who could object to that? Their story is rotten nonsense. It is an effort to create plausible deniability as a misleading subterfuge. Their slick video production is not an innocent civics lesson for ignorant troops who somehow need additional instruction in military law. It is, in fact, an effort to undermine the President, to encourage disobedience of his orders, to sow chaos in the ranks, and to promote continued lawfare and turmoil in the military, all of which is intended to hamstring this President because they disagree with his policies. The false justification The Democrats claim an innocent – even praiseworthy – motive. They just want to educate or remind the troops of their duty to refuse unlawful orders. Rep. Houlahan, for example, claims that the video was akin to a public service announcement by “reminding our military of their constitutional obligations and reassuring them that, if they are ever given an unlawful order, they do not have to carry it out.” Just carrying out their civic duty as public servants, you see. Despite their claim that the troops need additional instruction from them on the topic, it is a fundamental tenet of U.S. military law that unlawful orders must not be obeyed. The “I was just following orders” defense has been soundly rejected – with fatal results for some who invoked it – from at least the Nuremberg war crimes tribunals. Everybody knows about it. Additional instruction by senators and representatives was not needed. That excuse is a sham, a lie. https://johnalucas6.substack.com/p/the-democrats-illegal-orders-video

Yeah they basically put themselves in a position where they needed to get a 3 and out or the game is over.

Bills 19 Steelers 16

Bills 31 Tin cans 20

Got to love when the math immediately makes sense

Stillers - 30 Bilz - 21

They could be in the exact same position down 31-24 and have 5 1/2 minutes left on the clock instead of 3. The huddling is insane when you are trailing. There is a limited amount of possessions remaining and your defense struggles to stop anything.

They lost the brains of the operation when Johnson left, Campbell certainly isn’t it.

I guess, but then your offense needs to score 2 TDs instead of just 1 TD. The tradeoff would be Scenario 1: - Your defense needs to force a punt or turnover - Your offense needs to convert the FG, and have a TD drive Scenario 2: - Your defense needs to prevent a TD and force a FG - Your offense needs to convert the 4th down, score a TD, and then have another TD drive I think scenario 1 is more likely, but it's close (Packers did score 4 consecutive TDs up to that drive).

It's the coach's fault, right? Points and recover an onside kick, come on it's easy.

Micah Parsons making huge plays, what a great pickup for the Packers.

Now kick the FG 🤔

How can it not? What is he gonna need a cast on?

Nik McMillan is great They might be the best one two punch in the Mac with nobody to get them the ball

Detroit is playing with zero urgency, I have no clue what the plan is here. They trust their defense to get a quick stop?

expected value of kicking FG in that spot vs EV of going for it results in EPA +/- not terribly complicated, nor something to outright reject because it runs counter to your feels

That would be a hilarious misfire. Even if the "mutual parting of ways" over a disagreement in usage was just PR - putting it out there that you essentially asked for your release over playing time just to come back to a spot where you'd get FAR less playing time as a Practice Squad member would make him look really, really, really dumb. I think he'd sooner sign on to another teams Practice Squad before coming back here after having Schefter say it was a mutual parting of ways over asking for more snaps. I can't think of a time where it was reported someone asked for their release and then immediately came back, let alone coming back to a lesser role.

The thought is you need to score a TD and then hold Green Bay to a FG at best. Then you get the ball back down 6 and right back in it. Getting to down by 7 and then kicking off doesn't help when their offense has had its way with you all day.

Why am I never impressed with Aidan Hutchinson, am I missing something?