pennstate10

I’m with you. Seasons not over yet, but it’s entirely possible that a 12-5 Bills team will be seeded lower than an 8-9 Ravens team. That somehow seems wrong.

The clock operator botched the final play, but I think the timing was correct. On first play officials called maye oob. They were wrong, and replay fixed it. The rule there is either 10 sec runoff or spend a TO, t simulate what would have happened if they ran a play with a running clock. The 10 sec runoff is from when knees were down, not from when he was called oob. I amagine they looked at the clock and saw 16 sec when his knee touched down, then ran off 10 sec so final play started with 6 sec. On the second play, clock never started. I guess the play was 4-5 sec, so letting the FG attemp go was the right call. They always say official time is kept by some secret referee on the field. I think it would be tough for an official to watch player for fouls and keep time, but that’s what the nfl says.

Nah, the key was DB was not going for the ball. DB has the right to the ball. If he had located the ball and made the exact same contact it would be no foul. But as it was he contacts Shakir before he even turns his head. That becomes PI at that instant and the rest of the play is irrelevant. Except for prop bets and fantasy stats.

I’ve been a Bills fan for 40 yrs. IDont think I’ve ever seen a KR as consistently good as Davis has been over the past month.

Yeah. He was being held, no flag. Glad he got the sack.

I put a few bucks on Allen for mvp at +1100 a couple weeks back.

All true.

I’m curious why you say Vrabel outcoached McD? Did McD coach Bishop to take a bad angle on first long TD? Or did McD coach stripes not to call holding on second long TD?

How can anyone other than 17 be mvp.. I guess I’m biased, but no other QB does what he does. Commands a team and brings them back from the dead. Yes, 2-5 yrs ago Mahomes was as good or better. But in 2025? Gotta be 17. Also, I took Allen at +1100 for mvp a couple weeks back.

Lotta clock shenanigans

Yeah. Looked like 42 was held

Ok that was a hold

Not a catch. but pi no diff except fantasy

Palme4 ver was about 10 in on that play

Ok stripes owe us another one

I’m sorry, but 7 looks like he’s running in quicksand

Really marginal call

Shouldn’t have to spend a red flag

That’s a touchdown. Knees were up

Best play by far is KO return

Bad angle bishop

Obvious late hit

TDS are a good thing! Im very much in favor of TDs and more TDs. But only for the Bills.

Commentary on this topic from another well known “libtard” source. Forbes magazine. https://www.forbes.com/sites/omerawan/2025/12/12/the-problems-with-the-fda-claims-that-the-covid-19-vaccine-killed-10-kids/ Cliff notes. The true number, from FDA sources, was between zero and seven. Question: What were the ages of the individuals? Sex? Interval between vaccine and death? Comorbidities? Clinical findings? Autopsy results? Who reviewed these cases, and what was her/his level of expertise? We know none of this data, because the insane clown posse committed to “radical transparency” has released none of it, although this memo was widely distributed over 2 weeks ago. Elect a clown; expect a circus.

Its not necessarily bad science, but simply science that is limited by its design. Design was observational study. Whenever you read about any study, in any medical journal, think about the design. For instance, lets say that your hypothesis is that snow shoveling causes fatal heart attacks. Here are 4 study designs, in order of weakest to strongest. 1) Case report. a doc publishes a report that some dude was shoveling snow, had a hear attack, and died. No controls. 2) Case series. A doc publishes that he saw 10 patients in the ER over the last 3 years who were shoveling snow when they developed a heart attack. No controls. 3) Case control. A doc studies hear attack patients who are in the hospital, and asks them when they last shoveled snow. The shovers are the cases, non shovelers are the controls. 4) Cohort study. Men choose either to be shovlers, or hire a neighbor kid, and never touch a shovel. You then follow these men for months to years, and see if the shovelers have more heart attacks. Advantage is this is now prospective, with controls. Disadvantage is that men choose which group they are in. Maybe younger healthier guys are mostly shovelers, and older sickly guys choose to be non-shovelers. 5) Randomized experiment. Men are randomly placed into groups where they either shovel or dont. Conceptually, this is the best experimental design. Obviously, this type of design is often unethical or not feasible for other reasons. And these are often very costly studies. The best designs for vaccines are this type of design, where one group gets the vaccine, the other group gets a placebo, and the groups are chosen randomly. This was the design for the landmark mRNA vaccines, involving ~ 30K volunteers, and published in the NEJM. The linked study above is an observational study. This is a type of case control, suboptimal as the numbers of cases and controls are far different. These are generally considered weak evidence in the medical community, and usually more of a hypothesis generating study, as opposed to a definitive study.