Wraith

The change came during the bye week, so you've answered your own question.

How exactly should the Sabres try to retaliate against the offender when the offender was ejected from the game? Storm the dressing room?

Right, I assumed you know what positive correlation is. What I'm saying is that I don't think this author meant to imply that the positive correlation is causing movement towads the mean. I'm trying to say that the author is simply pointing out that, even with the movement towards the mean, the scores tend to stay on the same of the mean due to the positive correlation between test and retest. Lifting a few sentences or even a few paragraphs from the text is what is causing the apparent implication.

It has nothing to do with your phenomenon. Your quote from Berkely seemed to imply that a positive correlation between the test score and the retest score leads to regression towards the mean. That implication is bizarre and wrong. I am simply pointing out that the snippet from Berkely was saying that despite your phenomenon, people who scored very high still tend to score above average on a retest, due to the positive correlation between test and retest.

I think your confusion is caused by not getting the full context from where this quote was taken. The fact that there is a positive correlation between the test and the retest says nothing about how a person is likely to score closer to the mean on a retest, as you pointed out. HOWEVER, the positive correlation does mean that "...individuals who score much higher than average on one test tend to score above average...on the other test." Make sense?

Once again, you guys are arguing for the sake of arguing. Hell, you're practically arguing the same side. HA: "The sky is blue!" BJ: "No! The cloud's are white!"

I think this point is huge. The table below shows some pertinant statistics for the last 7 games, which represents the second half of the season so far, and conveniently aligns with the Bills bye week: NAME_________PCT___YPA___YPC___TD RATE___INT RATE___RATING LOSMAN______65.24__7.53___11.54___6.71______2.44_______100.03 RIVERS__.____59.18__7.35___12.41___3.57______2.55________83.29 MANNING_____57.56__5.87___10.20___3.36______3.78________69.96 ROETHLIS.____58.44__7.56___12.93___4.33______3.90________80.47 *YPC is Yards per Catch, which I like because it decouples yards gained from completion percentage. PCT 1) Losman (...and it's not even CLOSE) 2) Rivers 3) Roethlisberger 4) Manning YPA 1) Roethlisberger 2) Losman 3) Rivers 4) Manning YPC 1) Roethlisberger 2) Rivers 3) Losman 4) Rivers TD Rate 1) Losman (again...NOT EVEN CLOSE) 2) Roethlisberger 3) Rivers 4) Manning Int Rate 1) Losman 2) Rivers 3) Manning 4) Roethlisberger Rating (which is basically a weighted average of COMP%, YPA, TD Rate, and Int Rate) 1) Losman 2) Rivers 3) Roethlisberger 4) Manning As you see, their play coming down the stretch run is not even comparable. Losman has been far and away the best quarterback, despite factoring in duds against Green Bay and Indianapolis. It's not even close, really. I have these numbers for the top 15 QBs, Losman is nearly on par with Tony Romo, Carson Palmer, and Drew Brees, which is amazing, and WELL above Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. It makes you wonder how proficient the offense could be if we threw more (not that I'd suggest that, the current formula seems to be working).

Yup! Hell, by walking into the stadium and NOT attempting to pass, you've earned yourself a 2.1 rating. To get a 0.0, you literally have to do something WORSE than NOTHING. Almost no positive contribution to your team and a lot of negative contribution.

It's Christmas freakin' Eve. When's the last time Buffalo sold out a Christmas Eve or Christmas Day game?

The funniest thing about the 0.0 rating is that you and your two-old-daughters had passer ratings of 2.08 yesterday. The time I attempted to throw the remote to my fiance and she dropped it actually bumped my rating up to a 39.58!

An interesting topic, no doubt. The PERCEPTION amongst Bills fans is that the offensive line is playing better, at least with pass protection. Available stats say otherwise: Games 1 - 7: 197 Attempts, 21 Sacks, 0.11 sacks/attempt Games 8 - 14: 164 Attempts, 20 Sacks, 0.12 sacks/attempt So at first blush it appears that Losman is getting sacked at a HIGHER rate since the OLine change than before the change. However: Games 10 - 14: 137 Attempts, 11 Sacks, 0.08 sacks/attempt That stat line is omitting the first two games following the OLine change, against Green Bay and Indianapolis. Remember, in those two games, Buffalo allowed NINE sacks on 27 passing attempts, which is just outrageous. So it's possible that the first two games were a "breaking-in period" for the new OLine set up, and that their play since then is what is affecting people's perception. It's also possible that people's perception is being colored by watching the plays that do NOT result in a sack. There was definitely the perception, pre-bye week, that even on plays that Losman wasn't getting sacked, he was getting harassed and generally had no time to let a play set up. That is not the case in the last 5 games or so. Unfortunately, it's impossible to verify whether these perceptions are facts without going back and watching every game with a stop watch.

Interesting points. On your first point, the numbers I am using refer to "paid attendance" which, at least in theory, should reflect no-shows. Secondly, the difference between their demonstrated capacity and their listed capacity is not nearly as significant, to me, as the difference in paid attendance between their first two home games. These were both games that the NFL dubbed "sold out."

That's a separate issue. The issue I am addressing is how the NFL determines a sellout, why it appears to be applied unevenly, and how local fans and Buffalo's reputation are paying the price for it.

DISCLAIMER: I am not an "NFL has it in for Buffalo" conspiracy theorist nor am I particularly pessimistic about the Bills future in Buffalo. We have been bombarded with reports from the media that the Bills are lagging in attendance. Worse, they were the first NFL team not to sellout a home game this year, according to the league. In addition, we've yet to hear reports of any other team failing to sell out while the Bills are approaching their fourth straight blackout. But is the NFL being truthful about games being sold out? Or are they playing games or applying the rules differently from team to team? Let's exam the San Diego Chargers. San Diego plays their games in beautiful Southern California. They are also owner of the NFL's best record at 12-2. They boast the league's best running back and MVP candidate in LaDanian Tomlinson and a potential Defensive Player of the Year in Shawne Merrimen. San Diego's Qualcomm Stadium has a listed capacity of 71,294 seats, according to these sources: http://www.stadiumsofnfl.com/capacity.htm http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/attendance (You have to work out the capacity from attendance and %full). Yet, San Diego's largest paid attendance this year has been 67,837. Let's call that their "demonstrated capacity." That is 3.5K short of their listed capacity. But that's not the worst of it: Five times (out of seven home games), San Diego has not come to within 1K of their demonstrated capacity. Below is a table comparing San Diego's paid attendance this year versus their listed capacity and demonstrated capacity. Sources for this info come from NFL.com game books and verified using the espn attendance site listed above. SAN DIEGO ATTENDANCE BY WEEK (2006) WEEK__ATT______+/-LISTED CAP___+/- DEMONSTRATED CAP___OPP_____ 2______64,344____-6,950__________-3,493__________________TENN 5______67,837____-3,457______________0__________________PITT 8______66,598____-4,696__________-1,239__________________STL 9______65,558____-5,736__________-2,279__________________CLE 12_____66,105____-5,189__________-1,732__________________OAK 14_____67,514____-3,780__________ -323__________________DEN 15_____66,583____-4,711__________-1,254__________________KC I don't know which figures are more odd, that San Diego has yet to come within 3.4K of filling their stadium to it's listed capacity, or that there was a 3.5K difference in attendance between San Diego's first two home games and both were "sell outs." So what's the deal here?

Waaaaaay too many to choose from.... ...but I have so far managed to narrow the vote down to Jessica A, Jessica B, Carrie Underwood, Elisha Cuthbert, Eva Mendes, Jennifer Love Hewitt, or Maria Sharapova.

The Bills won the game yesterday against the Dolphins without playing a single down within Miami's redzone. The three touchdowns scored against Miami yesterday were the first three touchdowns the Bills have scored on offense between their opponent's 20 and 40 yard lines this season. Until yesterday, the Bills had passed for 3 touchdowns from behind their own 40 yardline, 3 between the 40 yardlines, and 8 in their opponent's redzone (with 7 of those 8 coming from within the 10 yardline). Until yesterday's game, Losman had the following statline from the opponent's 20 to the opponent's 40: 22/43___51.2%___203 Yards___4.72 YPA___0 TD___2 Int___45.1 Rating After yesterday's game: 25/46___54.3%___286 Yards___6.17 YPA___3 TD___2 Int___76.7 Rating From those stats, it's evident that our intermediate passing game had not been developing at the same rate the rest of our passing game had been. Hopefully this is a permanent shift. It was nice having the offense score TDs without having to rely on a huge TD bomb or long, methodical drive culminating in a 3 yard TD. Finally, we seem to have developed an intermediate passing game and scoring threat. Until now it has either been an incredibly long TD or an incredibly short one. Just thought this was interesting...

Think back to our game against Minnesota earlier this year.... (The Bills had a successful 40 yard onside kick ruined by a bogus call by the officials)

Hahahaha. Hey, don't hold back on my account.

I think if you're going to bother trying that, you might as well just put the offense back on the field and go for it. Relying on an incredibly well placed punt, a lucky bounce, and mass confusion doesn't really sound like a good strategy when you could, um, attempt a pass instead.

I believe Tampa Bay did it just two weeks ago against Pittsburgh...

If a punt goes past the line of scrimmage, it's a punt, no matter if it's partially blocked or not, so the normal rules are followed, including the fact that if the receiving team muffs it, it's a live ball.

What some people fail to realize (and what others intentionally ignore) is HOW Royal GOT so wide open. The answer, of course, is that Losman looked the safety off to the left before firing to the right for the touchdown. Neither Reed nor Evans was wide open on their touchdowns.

It's human nature. Most of the activity on this board after a loss occurs when Deluca says something stupid and 100 people rush to refute his claims. After a win, he just sounds pathetic and gets ignored...

Don't mind him, he's just a little testy because he needs a diaper change.

They decided his performance today went from crappy to spectacular when his total yardage clicked from 199 to 200....