HardyBoy

What's a tux and pucks? Was not expecting the story to be they had actual tuxes on. It's a good story, just sounded like it was setting up for them to have gotten into some debauchery the night before...not that that can't happen in a tux

Haven't watched yet, but I will die on the hill that JAs 2019 season was significantly better than people realize and the lack of deep ball accuracy in 2019 is a super flawed stat due to the number of games in 25+ mph winds they played in at the end of the season.

I pulled some initial stuff. Based on the distribution of running yards, the most likely place to get tackled on a run is not the line of scrimmage (did not qa my data or logic much at all tbf). What's more interesting is I did some super initial analysis to compare how many yards down field were solo tackles by down, specifically looking at Edmunds vs Wagner. I just did a box and whisker without looking at the specific quartile numbers, and these are small sample sizes for sure (just 2020 in my initial pass), but they look fairly similar, with Wagner getting more tackles for no gain or better, but it wasn't a huge diff (at the scale I was looking the differences appeared minimal, but would want to zoom in to get a better sense at some point). So what is my main takeaway? I just looked a solo tackles, and neither player looked great (I should get an Brian U season for a baseline I guess). Building in logic to get assisted tackles is a bit more work, but my initial thought is if you are having your middle linebacker making solo tackles, then you are already in trouble. That means the rb is able to dictate the run and the dline is not controlling the game.

Peace Karen

Haha, oh the projection. You're literally going to the manager asking that they stop someone from talking about something you claim is personal. "Excuse me manager, the cashiers were talking about their plans for after work for the first five seconds I walked up, and well yes I was staring at my phone the entire interaction, it's just that I would prefer they would not talk about personal stuff when they are working. "It wouldn't be so bad, but they're talking about a (whisper) gay friend inviting all of them over to his boyfriend's house later to hang out. "Well my wife and I, we're not sure why people just always have to bring sexuality into the conversation. I am not triggered by this, it's just upsetting enough for me to have to speak loudly about it to anyone that will listen over and over again. "Really my hope is that people stop saying things that make me feel like that when I am trying to buy condoms, cigarettes and beer from a cashier making like $9 an hour. My wife here who spends hours a day applying and removing makeup everyday to look more attractive, but not in a sexual way...she likes to point out that we aren't canceling others, we're canceling negative feelings inside ourselves, and yeah that requires others to only talk about a specific set of things, but those things are freedom and those other things are totally against freedom, so we good."

So I would argue it's all and only really about keeping teams behind the chains. A tackle for no gain on first and 10 is monumentally more valuable than 2nd and 3 because it limits an offenses options and allows the defense to get more exotic because they know the offense is likely to do a much smaller set of things that shrinks even more when you add in formations and personnel. One of the likely plays on 2nd and 3 is a run up the middle hoping for even just a yard or two to set up 3rd and possibly 4th and super short. Think of it this way, a stop for no gain on 2nd and 7 is the same as a tackle for a 4 yard loss on 2nd and 3. It's relative to what puts teams behind the chains. Your argument it sounds like is that Edmunds gets a bunch of no gain tackles on 2nd and 3 when maybe they bring Poyer up and free Edmunds up to sell out on the run a bit more. One of my biggest memories from the D last year were the lack of first down stuffs, and how often teams were in 2nd and 5 or less. Also, not many holding calls either getting teams into 1st and 20, which to me is a scheme issue as much as a player issue. 2nd half of the season was totally different (just as a feel, i haven't seen or pulled together any stats to support that). As for where the most likely place to get tackled is. I had a feeling you were maybe talking about yards in terms of hundreths place (1.00 yards) on an actual number line and thinking about it the way you did. Haha, I know how to do R Programming and could probably pull all runs from the last 20 years using a package in there that pulls play by play data and toss it into Tableau and get a nice visualization with a histogram and maybe some cool other more fun data visualizations to see if you're right. Doubt I'm motivated enough, but could do it Getting the down and distance and if Edmunds made the tackle and where is doable I would think, just would prob be a bit more involved...shoot part of me wants to jump on my computer right now and see if I can do it!...the other part of me wants to drink a beer and play video games a bit instead of folding my kids laundry (a 4 yr old and an 18 month old have so, so, so many clothes and they're so little so the pile of to fold goes down so slowly...like potentially 50 things to fold in a single hamper of kids clothes easy).

Ok, so please never post a picture of you and what I imagine is a wife or girlfriend on social media ever, and immediately delete any that currently exist. Make sure all of your posts on here never reference that person in anyway at all. Actually, you talking about what you individually did is personal too. Ok, so only pictures of landscapes with no context of you being there or taking the picture. You do that, then you can start talking about others keeping personal life personal. If you think that it is appropriate for you to share that personal information publicly, then what about this situation is different? And if by some slim chance you already don't do that, I would say the vast majority of people do, so swap in the avg "keep your personal life personal" person. Also, can we get a mod to please go through and delete every thread and post about Josh Allen's grandma please, and his gf too of course...sorry guys, we need to cancel the money we helped raise for the buffalo children's hospital because Buffalo619 wants us all to keep our personal lives private...that or there is just something about this specific topic that is driving him to want to cancel this topic...

Wait, I'm having a hard time with the statistically the most likely place for a rb to be tackled is the los?! Doesn't the avg nfl running back avg like 3 yards a carry? I mean it's possible that the median is los, and crazy long runs bump that avg up for rbs compared to their median, but that doesn't seem right either. Also, you're completely undervaluing a run for no gain...it seemed like just about every time the bills d got the other team behind the chains on first down they would have a significantly higher chance to get teams off the field...I mean no duh, that's true for all teams I'm sure...but the Bills strength is their nickle d...if they could get a team behind the chains, edmunds could sell out pass more on play action etc. Long way to say a tackle for no gain last year was super important to this defense and they felt really rare until the second half of the season when Edmunds started coming on strong and the entire d started clicking.

I think you would then need to see who is leading the bills in tfl, because that could very well be a scheme thing too ( no idea just something that would be fair to rule out). Also, I think I remember Edmunds has been seeing a lot of play action, which in the nfl is magnitudes of degrees more sneaky than in college. I'd almost argue that he is overly instinctual and is more easily tricked by PA as a result. This might be something similar to looking at burnt toast and saying well at least you know the toaster works, but...being able to get so many tackles at the line of scrimmage, when at least the prevailing sentiment is he can be wrong footed by play design, means he has elite recovery skills? Anyway, we're not talking about the third quarter of the season Edmunds from last year right? Just want to make sure because definitely looked like something clicked for him at the end of the season last year.

I think Welker honestly was a bit ahead of his time. By the end of his career he sadly had a bit of a 1000 yard stare going on sadly. I think the changes in the rules really helped Edelman just a few years later avoid the concussions. Was for the best tasker mostly played st.

The salary cap only applies to the top 50 on a roster (or something like that). I guess it's possible you would be bumping a rookie minimum deal out of the top 50 if you have a vet minimum guy on the practice squad, but only the top 50 or whatever players count toward the salary cap...the rest is just a cash flow thing only (no cap implications)

See the logic arguments only get you to the point of saying something is plausible. You're taking a huge leap here and any research is hugely biased by societal expectations. I mentioned this on like page 3, but saw some research that nearly a third of gen z report as not being completely 100% straight. That's massive. Not to stereotype, but to address the argument, there are not enough theater and ballet kids to make up 30% of boys. I would say those activities are already overly represented by gay boys (you say because those activities draw them because of their orientation, I say it draws them because it's a safe and accepting space compared to other activities. When you get into a number the size of 33%, you can't say it's actually 50% everywhere else except the football team where it's like 2%, and only the kicker. 33% to me is something that is likely equally dispersed across an entire population. Also, if I was going to do a sport that proved how masculine and not possibly gay I was, then it would definitely be football. Care to guess what the football players at my school called players on our state champ soccer team for playing a "gay" sport. Again, are people scared of showering with a gay guy because the gay guy will get turned on, or because they're afraid they will get turned on...33% is a really big number folks.

Ah gotcha. Don't forget they've been trying to figure out a way to "cure" homosexuality for a really long time, so funding might have been there to a degree. Also, there is a lot of opportunity for that type of research on college campuses where it is more acceptable to be openly gay, but you could be right on the lack of a large enough or diverse enough sample size. Now I'm talking about psychological research, if you're talking about neuropsych, like fMRI brain imaging stuff you might be right. Tough to show people gay porn when it's a felony to possess it I guess. You know what, you might have persuaded me to change my mind a bit. To be fair, you make a real solid point, and I honestly thought you were just saying that because it felt right because feelings...nope, you got a pretty solid logical argument there (seriously). For all we know, there could be a crap ton of money flowing into this research for a long time, but you really might be right. You'd think there was a ton of research into mmj, but somewhat similar reasons have lead there to be a huge gap of 60 or so years in that research until recently.

Oh, I was very much not joking, I just am not going to be super direct, but I'll turn it up just a little. You're assuming the women would become aroused though. They very much likely would not (there are coed showers all throughout europe...they don't devolve into orgies, because it's just nudity. You're assuming the gay man would get aroused as well, they very much likely would not (unless I missed the part where you just have a huddle of guys in art museums staring at nude sculptures unable to move without a binder in front of them like 7th grade. Anyway, look up projection in terms of defense mechanisms.

Right, playing the who's more oppressed game is awful, but I'd argue the need to justify your feelings of being oppressed when the nazis literally did human centipede type experiments on people in your demo group is worse. Agree, and I think the oppression of gay people is rooted more deeply as well...same thing probably. There is also a scape goat element to it too though, and with something like being gay, where it's not a physical thing, people could accuse you of it and find some birth mark arbitrarily and you're toast.

Why, you think his teammates will start getting turned on thinking about how someone might potentially find them attractive? That would be super awkward! Do you shower in the gym with people you don't know? If you suddenly did know someone was gay, would you run out of there covering your junk? June must be a real tough time because of all the people wearing flags in solidarity of pride month...july can't get here fast enough, eh? All serious questions.

If there was some kind of physical characteristic of being gay, I'm not entirely sure things would be all that different. How about we set this imperfect line...if the nazis did crazy unethical scientific research on a demographic group you are a part of, you don't need to justify gains in societal acceptance...

Lol, I'm not crazy, you're crazy! Except you can measure the wavelengths of light coming off an object and see that all other wavelengths get absorbed by the object, except the wavelength corresponding to the color people see. You really honestly think there hasn't been a ton of research on this stuff, come on now.

If I'm colorblind and can't perceive blue, my perception is wrong.

I would argue the primary virtue signaling I've seen in this thread is in the "why is this news?" contingent. How would you feel if someone told your brother to get out of a communal shower because they knew he was gay? How would he feel? Also, my guess is your brother is laughing about people who suddenly feel like they made some major personal achievement because they retweeted this news. Otherwise it sounds like he is minimizing the challenges gay people face, which I'm assuming is not the case. The Trevor Project or Dan Savage's It Gets Better Project aren't a thing if there wasn't a need for it. It does sound like your brother had a really supportive situation though based on the tiniest amounts of subtext, but careful applying that to everyone.

That could just as easily be that all the people you know who haven't come out play sports. Plus, there absolutely could be data on that, come on. Also, how well do you know all 10 of these men? Like you talked at a party, or are they like close relatives that you're on good terms with?

You have any data whatsoever to support your claim that being gay makes someone less masculine, and that fewer would play football? Please don't point to ballet or something to prove your point. There are certain sports society deems as acceptable for boys to play, and the implication is if a boy wants to do dancing or figure skating then they must be gay. My sons will do whatever they are interested in (sports, theater, music, art) and if anyone has a problem with that go judge elsewhere and I'll be plenty content with the knowledge my kids will not resent me for making them change who they are as humans to fit some arbitrary version of themselves that they think will gain my love and validation. So, so, so sad people would twist like a pretzel to protect the idea of immature high school boys thinking someone might stare at their junk and judge them (the irony is the normalization of that behavior against women in movies like porkys as being boys will be boys) instead of thinking about the child in that situation who could be going through potentially crisis levels of stress and loneliness. This isn't about being woke. It's about being ok with someone being in potential crisis emotional situations and instead of being compassionate, it's saying that person might look at me naked so lets ostracize them. That's legit awful, at best going to lead to long term emotional issues and potentially going to lead to suicide. There's no excuse for that. It sort of makes someone who would knowingly perpetuates that form of thinking an objectively bad person. (edit: I'm not talking about you specifically cba fan or the comment that masculine people aren't gay/ wont play football...talking about adults in general who would ostracize a teenager from their peers because they find something icky or whatever).

You have a picture of your wife and kids up at work (assuming you're married with kids...if not think about the person who sits next to you)? How exactly is you telling people you got engaged to your future wife as a guy any different than if you said you were engaged to someone of the same sex?

Here's the scary part (for you) then. I just saw a recent study that said something like only 63% of gen z consider themselves entirely heterosexual, compared to 80% plus for every older generation up to like 95%+ of the greatest generation. It's too quick and big of a shift between millennials and gen z for that to be environmental factors like flame ######ants. My money is on that is always how things have been, and you'd just get dragged behind a truck if you did what this dude just did and come out (still happens places). Or told it's cool, be who you are totally, we're just going to ostracize you, because "plain facts." So curious how sports are even still possible these days...people must be getting dressed in their cars to avoid the stares :\ Kinda makes you wonder about all the locker rooms you've been in and all the people definitely not potentially interested in men. Or...makes you maybe wonder why you are protecting your psyche so much from potentially having someone think a thought in their own head (you didn't even say act on any attraction...freaking thought police much). Oh man, what would happen if you found out years later that a teammate came out, and they gulp, had seen you naked in the shower...ahhhhh the horror! Also, i played sports all through high school and a bit in college, I'm 37...i have never showered naked once with teammates in any sport I've ever played, not once. Also, there are teen coed showers in Europe from what I understand, and they don't devolve into full on orgies at all, it's just nudity...I genuinely think you'd have been just fine, and my hope is your fear of being seen in the shower alone with someone who was openly gay in turn leading to rumors about you would be lower on your priorities than sticking up for a teammate that was getting bullied.

Ok, well you should be talking to the people that view him differently then, because people absolutely will now unfortunately.