JujuFish
-
Posts
119 -
Joined
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by JujuFish
-
-
On 5/24/2024 at 3:16 PM, 90sBills said:
Probably making close to his dad’s career earnings with his rookie contract. Wow.
If overthecap.com is right, his dad made almost that exact amount through his first 9 seasons ($35,304,765). He added another $31.6 million in his final 4 seasons.
-
1
-
-
If the Browns win, then KC for sure. That'll send Cleveland to Baltimore for what might be the best game of the playoffs and will take out at least one of the two (IMO) biggest threats to Buffalo out of the conference. Otherwise? Who cares. Just win.
-
14 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:
The argument is that Mahomes didn't play the first season...which is factually wrong. He played the last game. So I am removing Allens rookie year up to the last game JUST LIKE MAHOMES so their rookie years match. And when you do, by seasons end, Allen will still have more TD's than Mahomes if he stays on the pace he is on now
I didn't argue that he didn't play his first season. In fact, my numbers include every single game he played in his first season, just like they do Allen's. Removing Allen's games doesn't make anything sense. Try again.
-
11 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:
You didnt answer my question though, and you are ignoring the fact that Josh still has 6 games to go. By seasons end its MORE than likely, that even if you back out Allens first 8 games to match Mahomes that he will STILL have more TD's than Mahomes.
Mahomes after 80 games: 204. Allen after 80 games: 182
Mahomes after 88 games: 219. Allen after 88 games: 206
Mahomes in games 81-88: 15. Allen in games 81-88: 24
I have no idea what point you're trying to make. By the end of the season, Allen will have played, barring injury, 14 more games than Mahomes in his first six seasons. And why would you take away Allen's first X games? What's the argument there?
-
7 minutes ago, jcamm1966 said:
beatdown coming vs Bengals 34 to17 cinn
I agree. 34 points to Cinci's 17.
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, Doc Brown said:
Without Brady, Bill Belichick is 0-4 against the Bills when his quarterback throws more than three times.
Ackshually *pushes glasses back up on nose* Belichick is 3-7 in such cases. 0-1 with the Browns, 1-1 in 2000 before Brady took over, 2-0 when Brady was out for the 2008 season, 0-1 when Brady was suspended in 2016, and 0-4 since Brady left.
-
1 hour ago, Buddy Hix said:
Allen’s salary hasn’t fully kicked in yet. Bills will feel the same pain shortly.
1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:Because we aren't paying our QB $40M yet, his deal kicks in next year.
Oh, we're definitely paying him. Allen is making $47 million for the 2022 season. Thanks to salary cap voodoo, his cap hit will be under $17 million.
-
2 minutes ago, BassToMouth said:
Hahaha. You think this isn’t a child like response? Nice hyperbole. Squeezing people out of their livelihoods is okay with you then gotcha. Pathetic.
Can't address the argument, can only try to put words in my mouth. Yes, that's what a child does who can't support their side.
-
4 minutes ago, BassToMouth said:
Why don’t you grow into an adult who cares about bodily autonomy more than a football game.
I'm not holding a gun to your head and shoving the vaccine in your arm, therefore I already care about bodily autonomy. Try again, child.
-
1 minute ago, BassToMouth said:
Ah yes infallible science.
You care more about football than a potential life changing decision. You likely have no clue how many in perfect shape athletes have been getting myocarditis and other serious issues from ‘science’ backed decisions.
I’m embarrassed for you
Myocarditis has a significantly lower incidence rate in the vaccine than from COVID. And it's temporary. COVID kills. Grow up.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, SirAndrew said:
I’m actually surprised by the number of people who think Allen will regress statistically. He put up huge numbers last year, so it’s very possible he might “regress”, but not a given. Josh was asked carry to the team, but that’s going to be his role. I don’t understand the idea that he won’t need to carry the team as much.
I'm surprised by the number of people who think it's an impossibility that Allen could regress. That's just absurdly blind faith and not couched in any sort of logic or reason.
-
2 minutes ago, NobesBLO13 said:
Do punters normally excite you?
Maybe he grew up during those years where the best player on the team was Brian Moorman.
-
12 hours ago, Philly McButterpants said:
I've been a member of this board since 2007 and I've never once seen or heard of "BBFS."
Battered Buffalo Fan Syndrome
-
Good thing we saved all our timeouts.
Good thing timeouts are only good for stopping the clock and not, you know, preparing a play properly.
-
Dumb penalty by Florence. Turn around, Flacco can get that pass out front.
Not only that, but had he turned around he would have had a great shot at intercepting that ball. Stupid, stupid move.
-
The Patriots will not win the East.
-
But when you have 0 superbowls, gotta take success where you can get it huh?
I'd be willing to bet the Fish haven't even been to a Super Bowl in your lifetime.
-
5-0 when Edwards plays more than 1 drive.
-
Considering I don't support either presidential nominee, this choice is easy.
-
Olberman is usually very funny and very smart.
Shirley, you can't be serious.
-
Don't you know? The Bills have subscribed to ieatcrayonz's newsletter.
-
(5:57) (Shotgun) 5-K.Collins pass incomplete deep right to 19-J.McCareins. PENALTY on BAL-55-T.Suggs, Roughing the Passer, 15 yards, enforced at TEN 20 - No Play. Penalty on TEN-71-M.Roos, False Start, superseded.
If there's a false start, isn't the play supposed to be blown dead? It doesn't seem to me that the penalty on Suggs should even have happened (which didn't even look like a penalty to me).
-
Looked to me like one of the Giants guys that got to Hasselbeck was offside on that play.
-
There is no extra charge for the HD channels. However, you still need a TV that supports HDTV.
You wouldn't be looking for HD channels unless you already had an HDTV. It would be ridiculous to argue that as part of the cost.
Ravens vs Chargers MNF game thread (no Bills talk please)
in The Stadium Wall
Posted · Edited by JujuFish
If you're down 14 late, it makes mathematical sense. 2 pointers are successful about 47.5% of the time. 1 pointers 95%.
If you score a TD and go for 2:
47.5% of the time, you'll have 8 points. Now a TD+PAT (95%) will win the game.
52.5% of the time, you'll have 6 points. Now a TD+2pt (47.5%) will tie the game.
Calculating out:
Make XP on first TD:
14 points: (95*.95) 90.25%
13 points: (.95*.05) 4.75%
Miss XP and forced to go for 2 on second TD:
14 points (.05*.475) 2.375%
12 points (.05*.525) 2.625%
Tie game: 92.625%
Lost game: 7.275%
Make 2PT on first TD and therefore kick PAT for the win:
15 points: (.475*.95) 45.125%
14 points: (.475*.05) 2.375%
Miss 2PT and go for 2 on second TD to tie:
14 points: (.525 * .475) 24.9375%
12 points: (.525 * .525) 27.5625%
Won game: 45.125%
Tie game: 27.3125%
Lost game: 27.5625%
Going for PATs will at best tie the game for you. Going for 2 gives you a greater than 45% chance to outright win and greater than 72% chance to do no worse than kicking PATs. Is a ~45% chance to win worth risking an extra ~20% chance to lose? Yes, yes it is.