Greg F

Don't have a problem with a pass play ... Manning should have taken the sac when nobody was open.

AFC East 4-0

I disagree. I think spot of the foul makes more sense. If it's a 40 yard pass and I am the defender I am going to tackle the receiver because a 15 yard penalty is preferable to a 40 yard completion. OTOH, I would get rid of the automatic first down. If the spot of the foul isn't enough for a first down so be it.

Yea ... but do you have a picture of your wife's boobs on your desk?

First Play: omaha rex 42 foot kink on 1 First Downs: 23.5

It doesn't. It wasn't the purpose of the post.

Perhaps. The Saints were second in attempts (by 2) just behind the Colts. The Seahawks were dead last in the league. Don't think that comparison would make a good argument.

Those stats don't mean crap. Brees threw 659 passes last year, Wilson only threw 452. That is a difference of 207, almost 13 more attempts per game. And Wilson's average per attempt was 2 tenths of a yard higher than Brees. Murray may have had the most yards but on yards per attempt (4.7) he was behind Justin Forsett (5.4), Jeremy Hill (5.1), Lamar Miller (5.1), Jamaal Charles (5.0), and Arian Foster (4.8).

Perhaps you missed the point. I took the point differential from 2013 as dictated by the pythagorean equation and calculated the projected W/L record for 2014. The results were rather shabby. Doing the same using the W/L record from 2013 instead of the pythagorean equation the results were marginally better (and probably not statistically significant). For 13 teams (40.6% of all the teams) the formula was off by 2 or more wins which is one better than the pythagorean equation. Of those 13 teams, 9 (28% of all the teams) were off by 3 or more wins. For 4 teams (12.5% of all the teams) the prediction was off by more than 4 wins. In reality, using the records from 2013 to project the team records for 2014 produced a stronger correlation than using the dubious pythagorean equation.

Ummm ... not really. The probability of flipping a coin 32 times and getting 16 heads or tails has a probability distribution of 0.14. IOW, you only have a 14% chance that you will get 16 heads and 16 tails. The probability that you will get 15, 16, or 17 heads or tails is about 0.40 or 40% of the time.

From the article he links to a "statistical primer" also written by him. The fact that he considers the "formula isn’t exactly for the faint of heart" tells me all I need to know about his math/statistical abilities. Can you say high school math? Just for fun I ran the formula from 2013 to predict the records for 2014 and then compared the results with the actual records. For 14 teams (44% of all the teams) the formula was off by 2 or more wins. Of those 14 teams, 8 (25% of all the teams) were off by 3 or more wins. Additionally, for 4 teams (12.5% of all the teams) the prediction was off by more than 4 wins. Seems a bit dubious to me but your mileage may vary.

Good article YoloinOhio. The OP's assertion that ACL injuries are "over-use injuries" is inconsistent with the research. For a review of the known risk factors see: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3435896/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3435909/ Another review specific to football and artificial surfaces is here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25164575

The Financial Times is essentially a business magazine. Economist are not business men and business men are not economist. Unfortunately a lot of people conflate business with economics as if they were one in the same in the same way they conflate popularity with importance. About the only thing you can say is Piketty popularized the debate. There has been a great debate going on long before this book was published. Interestingly enough if you had read the link I supplied the following from your link should have raised a red flag: In the link I provided, under the "The “Central Contradiction of Capitalism”" (starting on page 2), the simple algebra of Piketty is destroyed both logically and empirically. I suspect you didn't even bother to read it. Nor did you notice that the growing gap is addressed in "V. Capital versus Wealth" due to land valuations. Here is something to ponder. Go to the Forbes 400 richest Americans. Consider how many of them are heirs to their wealth. More important notice, with the exception of the 2nd generation Waltons, the dominance of first generation wealth. This doesn't scream the rich get richer, it screams the rich get replaced. Thomas Sowell has been pointing out for decades that the people in the different income groups don't stay in the same income groups. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTZyUE33pbA

It has some fundamental flaws.

Corporations do not really pay taxes ... they collect them. The end user of any product or service is the one who ultimately pays all the taxes. Politicians love to tax this way because it hides the tax from the end user. It appeals to a very fundamental part of human nature, greed.

Where are you getting these projections? To reach 20 billion by the end of the century world fertility rates, which have been declining since the mid 1960's would have to start increasing. Even if fertility rates remained unchanged for the next 85 years, which is highly unlikely, the world would only hit about 16 billion by the turn of the next century.

Reminds me of this.

Kind of like the mob. https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Xy3MtznDeqg

It could be unicorn farts too and you can't prove it can't be .....

bcc to be exact. Kind of works but not very elegant. And by default the emails don't end up in your sent items on your other devices, ends up in the inbox. Of course you could set up a filter to move them. Get a new device and nothing you sent prior to that new device will appear in the sent items box. There are other issues as well like when you delete an email from one device it doesn't remove it from the other devices. Of course you could use IMAP but that gets dicey as the size of your email grows and you increasingly get server timeouts. Things can get tedious very quickly. Of course the point was that Hillary made a nonsensical argument which none of the 'professional' journalist were smart enough to catch. That setting up a server for one device would for some reason be more technically challenging than for multiple devices.

To begin with her claim makes no sense. In fact, she has it half ass backwards. Had she said she set up her own server so she could use multiple devices it would at least made sense from a technical standpoint. Even the oldest and most primitive email system POP/Imap SMTP based email is adequate for users with a single device but is problematic when users have more than one device. While keeping the inbox on multiple devices is not a problem the emails you send from one device won't appear on any other devices. Bottom line. Single device is the simplest scenario any email system can do it. Multiple devices, harder. You need something like MS Exchange or Lotus Notes to maintain transparency across devices. She lied ... I am shocked I tell you ... just shocked! What is worse is what passes for a 'professional' journalist. Not so much that they are biased. Rather that the profession attracts people that are not particularly bright.

There, fixed it.

Here is Montana's first 14 starts. Year Team Cmp Att Yds TD Int W/L 1980 Rams 21 37 252 2 2 L Bucks 24 31 200 1 1 L Giants 9 15 151 1 2 W Patriots 14 23 123 3 1 W Saints 24 38 285 2 0 W Falcons 25 41 222 1 2 L Bills 25 36 263 1 0 L 1981 Lions 18 28 195 1 1 L Bears 20 32 287 3 0 W Falcons 24 34 274 2 2 L Saints 16 22 175 1 1 W Skins 15 28 193 0 1 W Cowboys 19 29 279 2 0 W Packers 23 32 220 0 0 W Montana's team went 8 and 6 not 6 and 8. Over his first 14 starts he had 20 TD's and 13 int's and a completion percentage of 65%. Manuel had 16 TD's and 12 int's (you only get 19 for Manuel if you include the 3 he ran for) and a completion percentage of 58.6%. Montana's QB rating for his first 14 games was 89.7, the league average in 1980 and 1981 was just under 75. OTOH, Manuel's QB rating over his first 14 games is 78.5 while the league average was over 91 for 2013 and over 90 for 2014. The only obvious conclusion is Montana preformed well above average in his first 14 games while Manuel was well below average for his first 14 games. A pill that seems hard to swallow for some people. Anybody that is more than a casual fan knows the rules have become more favorable for passing over the last 35 years which can be seen in the increasing average QB rating over time. It is silly to compare QB's from different eras without taking into account the historical changes to the game. Not nearly as funny as someone who compares a QB from the early 80's to a present day QB without including how each QB performed in relation to their peers.