Einstein

No, I definitely haven’t. I want to add MORE of Diggs-players. We need more playmakers. Worst i’ve said is Josh should be tougher on Diggs.

Wow. Look at McDuffie.

Bill Belichick. Great coach. Terrible GM.

This conveniently ignores that Diggs left minicamp and McDermott said that he was very concerned.

Well that is the most glass-half-full post i’ve seen in a while haha. Well done.

Blocking your teammates shot isn’t protecting a younger kid. It’s bullying.

I meant that you were proud of your son for bullying.

Your son sounds like the bully here too. Funny how parents can’t see it.

Data is technically plural, however it is often handled as a collective noun, resulting in its pairing with singular verbs and pronouns. Hence, "data is" is an appropriate usage. Or if you don’t believe me, you can check with grammar software:

Honestly, not all of us. Plenty of posters are happy to just make the playoffs. There was a thread a day or two ago, where a poster wrote that he would rather have 10 years of playoff appearances, but no Super Bowls, than five years of playoff appearances, and 1 Super Bowl win.

do you know his name of the name of the shop?

The Dungy defense that gave up 30+ points in the Championship game and Manning had to relentlessly score?

Bingo. That is exactly how I feel as well. Though, while I certainly wouldn’t say the Cincinnati loss was completely on coaching, I do not think McDermott did much right that day either.

Some are born with an eye for style. I am not that person.

But again, the sample is not only first time coaches. Technically the sample includes several hundred, since the probability is calculated by comparing all coaches to the coaches who made the Super Bowl in 40 years.

I have been invited to speak at an upcoming conference in Las Vegas, but I must admit that fashion and style are not my areas of expertise. Can you suggest any local shops or boutiques where I can find assistance in creating a stylish ensemble? All I have right now is the office-standard mix of blue/black/brown suits.

Haha, yeah. There is a chance that Allen drags McDermott kicking and screaming to a Super Bowl like Manning dragged Dungy.

Technically the sample includes several hundred, since the probability is calculated by comparing all coaches to the coaches who made the Super Bowl. This is called "shifting the burden of proof." The burden of proof lies with the accuser - you. You are responsible for presenting evidence and arguments to support your claim that I used sampling bias. When you shifts the burden of proof onto the accused, you are essentially demanding that the other party prove their innocence instead. Which is… insane. You can’t show a single shred of evidence that I used sampling bias because there is none. Which is why you continue to regurgitate that comment with any proof.

Again. Where is the proof? You have not shown a single shred of evidence that I did what you are accusing me of. You’re just regurgitating the same unproven assertion. You can variable any meaningful stat into extinction. For example. Why count INT’s? There are many variables for why a QB may have thrown one.

I agree. I think you and I more alike than many others here, even if our methodologies differ.

Not at all. I mentioned in my original post that I think McD deserves this year to move the needle and advance to the Super Bowl. Firing him at this moment would not be productive. The point of this thread is to ascertain the leash that McDermott should have going forward. So let me ask you - how much longer would YOU give him? Indefinitely? Would you be willing to spend Allen's entire career waiting for McDermott to figure it out and not make mistakes in the playoffs? 2 more years? 3 more yeas? What, in your opinion, should be McDermott's leash?

Ok, this is progress. Before you claimed confirmation bias (but with no proof). Now you're claiming a calculation error. Where is the exact calculation error? Woh! I'm not upset at all! I know it's not your fault that you and others don't understand. Now we are back to confirmation bias. Where is the proof? You say this, but provide not a single shred of proof. Because my goal was to ascertain McDermott's chance of making a Super Bowl. That is the next step. He has made an AFC Championship game, the next step is to at least make the Super Bowl. Though winning would be great as well. Who wants to tell him? lol!

It's really not. I respect your architectural knowledge greatly but you're out of your domain here. For example, when our company conducts focus groups, we do it in groups of 10 or 12 people. Because that is all you need for a sampling of the entire United States demographics. To be fair, it is typically done in 5 rounds, so it's more like 50 to 60 people, but it is still a small (to you) sample size. Another example is Nielsen and their "people meters" process where they only collect data from 0.03% of US households yet estimate the data to over 120 MILLION. Augie told me to post my tax return. I did, for fun. Then several posters became jealous of my financial situation

Now that’s true. I still chuckle about you thinking simple calculus needs to be peer reviewed 😂. I wasn’t the only poster who called you out on that nonsense.

A very consistent coincidence over 40 years of Super Bowls… I’m still open to you proving this, but every time I call you out on it, you simply repeat “sampling bias!”. That’s not proof - that’s simply a broken record. .