Chandemonium

You want OT? I’d much rather see Barkley in for the fourth quarter because we’re up by 40.

It was only 2 years, but I’d count the Rex Ryan Jets the years they went to back to back AFCCG’s as competitive rivals for the Pats.

It’s a shame it tends to get overshadowed by the Dalton 4th down TD pass, but the Kyle Williams TD week 17 against the fish the year the drought was broken.

If it’s anything like the one I took for high school hockey back in the day, it’s a computer test that looks at how quickly and accurately you can process information. I don’t remember the exact details, but it was something like different shapes flashing on the screen and depending on the shape you were supposed to hit different keys. How well you do on the baseline is recorded, and you have to match that score to return to play after a concussion. I suppose it would be possible to cheat by mailing it in on the baseline, but assuming you tried your best on the baseline I don’t see how you could cheat after the fact on the return to play test.

I’m honestly baffled at all the doom and gloom, hollow victory, ugly win type takes. Yes the defense needs improvement and yes it was too close for comfort, but we never trailed the whole game and I never really felt like the Pats* had a real chance until the final drive. Even when they tied it up both times I was confident we would answer, and we did.

It’s the weirdest thing though. Every time I watch it my allergies act up at the beginning.

At this point is the game on no matter what, or could it still be cancelled/postponed again last minute if more Titans test positive?

Maybe a nice quilt with some Bills fabric.

I know. I was getting at the stats being even more telling than I would’ve thought.

That’s a one percent difference. Even if the sample size is the entire Brady/Belichick era, I’d be surprised if that was statistically significant due to the small number of games played in a football season and they’re the team most known for the not losing 2 in a row thing.

I tend to think the reason good teams rarely lose 2 in a row is because good teams rarely lose, period. If football games were as simple as throwing dice each game would be a discrete outcome, with the probability of one completely unaffected by the previous outcome. With sports I don’t think you can completely discount the psychological effects of a loss on the players, and injuries that happen one game can have impacts that carry over to the next, but I still think the “good teams don’t lose 2 in a row” thing as a product of extra motivation or focus is overstated, if it exists.

No, because if minny kicked Seattle likely would’ve played for the tie whether it was 7 points or 8. If they had gone for 2 earlier and made it, the field goal would’ve made it a 2 score game. Of course this is all moot because the vikes went for it and got stuffed, but I still think trying to go up by 6 was the right play on minny’s last TD.

I don’t understand not going for 2 there. 5 pts vs 4 makes no difference. You’re still winning if Seattle gets a field goal and down if they get a TD. With a 6 pt lead at least they need 2 field goals to tie, or you’re still tied if they get a td but miss the PAT.

Ah, now I see.

What’s the story on the vikes being 1-3? This is the first I’ve seen them this season and they look pretty good against the Seahawks.