DonInBuffalo
-
Posts
577 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by DonInBuffalo
-
-
Well apparently it's something pretty serious, since presumably he was already in Miami. On a personal level, I hope everything is OK.
As far as the game, with McCargo out and Williams not 100%, I'm sure they would have liked to dress Ellis. Denney and/or Kelsay may have to take some reps at DT.
-
IMO it's extremely unlikely, given his volume of experience, and overall level of play during those years.
-
The funny part is that some people are actually buying these things. I looked at the Browns game, and there's only a few $7 options left. Some people who bought them are selling them. Most are trying to cut their losses by selling them for $5 or $6. One idiot is trying to sell a pair at $90 each.
I checked out some of the other teams. The Ravens options are just a little higher than the Bills for regular season games. They're selling options for playoff game at $45 and AFC Championship game at $25. Some Celtics-Lakers options were over $100 a seat.
-
I haven't seen it watching on TV, but I'm guessing it doesn't "flop around" like some have suggested. It just appears to do that because it is a fixed position and doesn't move along with the rest of his hand. If they wanted to "straighten it out", they would need to re-fracture the joint and reset it. (and even then, it would still be immobile and not move fluidly with the rest of his hand)Why dont they put a metal rod in it or something? -
I have a similar, although not nearly as serious/noticeable condition with my right pinky. I broke it in a bicycle accident about 20 years ago. Since the fracture went through the lower knuckle, that never properly healed and the joint doesn't completely bend. I can bend it more/less far enough for a standard overlap golf grip; that's about it.
Baldinger presumably broke his finger playing, and might have been playing some C at the time. They probably decided to set the finger where it wouldn't get in the way when he was snapping the ball.
-
That is correct. (responding to original post) Scott is the #3 OT, so with Bell not practicing, he would be taking all the first string reps at LT, and Chambers all the reps at RT. Meredith, the guy they signed off Green Bay's practice squad, is next on the depth chart.
-
Apparently there are some sort of bots out there that are programmed to look for specific keywords. I remember one time at KFFL when somebody started a thread that included "Brittney Spears" in the title, and the thing had something like 20,000 views only a few hours later.
-
Chris Brown mentioned in his blog that they asked the NFL for a 3 day roster exemption for Lynch. That means they'll have to cut somebody on Thursday. I'm guessing Jenkins, since he was the one who was cut the last time they needed a spot.Wait have the Bills released anyone for Marshawn? -
I agree completely. I've been saying for years that April has way too much influence on roster decisions. Most teams have one ST "ace", somebody who plays on all the ST and pretty much anchors those units. The Bills have four roster spots dedicated to players who will play almost exclusively on ST, (Wendling, Corto, Jenkins, McIntyre) and none of those players are even a ST captain.It's because the tools keep too many players on the roster (like John Wendling) that can only play special teams. It destroys the ability to develp depth.In addition, the roster is somewhat inflexible because of the large numbers of players at certain positions. They have 6 CBs, 5 safeties, and 6 WRs. (plus Hardy on PUP) (I'm guessing Jenkins gets cut tomorrow to make room for Lynch)
The end result is a "numbers game" where there just aren't enough spots left to develop players at positions such as OL, DL, LB.
-
That's similar to the alignment the Bills often use on 3rd down, only with two RBs in the backfield instead of a RB and a TE.Under this scenario, we can have Freddy, Marshawn, or Freddy AND Marshawn back in QB protection, while still having three to four receivers, OR we can have five receivers.Either way, four of those five weapons (Freddy, Marshawn, Evans, and Owens) have proven themselves MORE than capable, while whoever fills in the third receiver position (Reed, Nelson, Parrish, Johnson, Fine), passes for serviceable, at the very least.
Meanwhile, given the blocking capabilities it provides, it can hide our current weaknesses at tackles, and using backs as blockers either props up or replaces our present short comings at tight end, as well.
Can any X and O guru provide the strategic pros and cons of opting for such a system?
You really couldn't use that as an every down setup, since you don't have enough blockers at the point of attack to run standard running plays. You would be pretty much limited to draws.
On passing downs, when they use that alignment, I would like to see them try Josh Reed in the backfield instead of a TE.
-
having Harris take reps at safety tells me they pretty much don't want to put Wending on the field on defense, period.
-
Out of the three listed, the first one is the only one that I agree with. When you're on the 32, you should be trying to run plays to either get closer, or maybe even score a TD.
As far as McKelvin's fumble, it's April's job to instruct him immediately prior to the play. He should have been instructed to do essentially the same thing that Fred Jackson did on a kickoff return late in the Tampa Bay game. Grab the ball with both hands, and fall to the ground at the first sign of contact. Since McKelvin clearly didn't do that on the play in question, I think it's safe to say that April is the one who dropped the ball (pun intended) on that play.
As far as the punt decision, in spite of all the media and other criticism, I can't say that I disagree with it. Prior to the TD drive, the Bills had held New Orleans to 3 and out on the two previous possessions. The 4th quarter was only half over. The Bills still had all three timeouts. They were on their own 28 yard line. If you go for it and fail, you're essentially handing them the game. When you're behind, you want to extend your chances to catch up for as long as possible. Don't throw all your eggs in one basket unless absolutely necessary. The Bills and Saints had run pretty much the same number of plays in the game up to that point, so other than a knee jerk reaction to the previous scoring drive, there was no specific reason to believe the defense was "worn out" to the point where they couldn't stop them.
-
The reason you defer is because the stadium is half empty for the first drive of the 2nd half. People are still finishing their cigarettes, peeing and buying beer. If the visiting team gets to start the 2nd half with the ball, you're giving them a tangible advantage.
-
Why would any judge grant them a PFA? I don't see how anyone in their right mind would seriously believe that Gannon "made terroristic threats".That's true for the Masters now but it wasn't back in '94. Gary McCord is literally banned from the property and since it's private property whaddya gonna do? He can't go as a guest, he can't go as a broadcaster, I don't even think he can buy a ticket to the Masters. If I were CBS and wanted to make a fuss I'd have McCord come and do commentary from the first piece of public property or right of way.It does sound like the NFL has something in it's contract about this but if there were ever an owner to challenge this it would be Davis. If they want to contend that Gannon made terroristic threats and act to ban him from the premises and get a PFA keeping him a distance away from Raiders property I think that the contract clause might be hard to enforce because one would think that the PFA would supercede contract law. They probably couldn't do anything about road games, but they could mess him up in Oakland. Plus, they don't own the stadium so they can't really keep him out of there, but they can probably keep him off Raiders property.
CBS went along with McCord's banning because they want to keep the tournament. Also, it would be kind of difficult for McCord to see the tournament if he isn't on the property.
Funny unrelated story about McCord: One time during a tournament, during a commercial break, some people in the blimp were clowning around and decided to zoom in so McCord's face filled the entire screen. He decided he'd play along and mooned the camera. Only one problem - the sponsor of the tournament was an electronics company, I think NEC. All of the tents where the players' families, company execs, etc. were filled with new big screen TVs, and all of them were getting that feed. Oops.
-
Totally agree. Why do they have this stupid rule of only one doubleheader each week?
Because it's in the contract since the networks want it that way and pay more money to the NFL for exclusive time slots?
Is this a trick question?
-
Here's the list of things you can/can't bring into the stadium:
http://www.buffalobills.com/tickets/stadiu...ited-items.html
Stadium lots open 5 hours before kickoff. Satellite lots open whenever the people running the lot decide to start letting people in.
-
When I reviewed the ST plays in the New England game, I saw him on all the ST units except kickoff return. He's essentially #4 on the depth chart behind Whitner, Scott, and Byrd, so he's not going to get on the field on D very often if everybody is healthy.
-
A few things that might help:
You really don't need two links to TSW on the same page. You could change the one in the header to read "Buffalo Bills Forums". I suggest you use the same name as the menu for consistency. Also for consistent look & feel, I suggest you change "Aud Club" to "Buffalo Sabres Forums" too.
It might help to use acronym tags to put tooltips on those menu options, so when new users hover their mouse over one of those links, a brief explanation of what the link leads to gets displayed.
If the forum SW lets you, it might help to make the font of "Buffalo Bills Forums" in the menu more prominent. For example:
Buffalo Bills Forums > Sports Talk > The Stadium Wall
-
That site has some interesting content, but again people need to be careful how they interpret the results of their calculations. For example, on this page:I really started this analysis as a good faith attempt to analyze the decision using some objective metrics, and somehow it all fell apart. Some folks got it.In any case, as I pointed out, the 96% figure didn't come from my data, so people are free to assume it's entirely made up and/or falsified. (Actually, I don't think anything about this is particularly easy or "softball.") In the very low probability (pun intended) that the question was a sincere attempt to learn a little more, I'd point you to this link, which I think is helpful. It's a good summary (or what I think is a good summary of the concepts. http://www.advancednflstats.com/2008/08/win-probability.htm.
Also, FWIW, I provided a few other references on this as well, if you can request from me via private message if you're interested. There are also several other forums that spend time analyzing these type questions, though they're not Bills-focused, obviously.
That's it on this ... until the next 4-and-? ...
http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/09/4t...udy-part-1.html
That's a complete crock. Put simply, the only event in a football game with a known probability is the coin flip.We don't have such clear-cut options and we don't know the probabilities and payoff values of our decisions. But in football, we do. -
There are some fundamental flaws in your logic. The biggest one is that you're making inappropriate statistical conclusions. (or phrasing those conclusions very poorly) The only point in the game where anybody knew what the probability of the Bills winning the game was when it was over. Any time prior to that, all you can do is estimate the probability based on a variety of factors. One estimate could be based on what other teams did in similar circumstances. That is presumably what you did above. However, that estimate doesn't take into account a myriad of factors that are unique to the specific Bills game in question. The most obvious factor is the most if not all of the players and coaches are different than all the other games that were used to make your estimate. So your estimate is at best a very rough guess.FWIW, I did poll a football-savvy statistician on this and his conclusion was that going for it was indeed the better move, but that the decision itself wasn't particularly consequential on those facts.The gist of his response: At that time in the game, with a 10 point lead, his numbers showed that the Bills had close to a 98% chance of winning. Deciding to go for it would've pushed the chance of winning almost all the way to 100%. Deciding to attempt a FG instead reduced the chance of winning, but only reduced it to about 96%.
So, his conclusion was that attempting a FG reduced our chances of winning, but not dramatically.
Going for the 4th-and-1 earlier in the game had a bigger positive impact, probability-wise, than the negative impact of the erroneous decision to kick the FG at the end.
When coaches make decisions they do so not just based on probabilities, but strategy as well. Here are some of the strategic reasons to kick the FG in that situation:
- If you go for it and fail, it's a momentum swing that could spark the other team. Going for it and failing would also deflate the enthusiasm of the crowd.
- Knowing that the opponent has to score two TDs allows you to adjust your defensive strategy accordingly. You really don't care if they score on the first drive, as long as they have to use all (or virtually all) of the remaining time. You can play prevent and make them dink and dunk their way down the field.
Strategic reasoning can't always be quantified. I can't think of any straightforward way to quantify what I listed above.
Your statistical reasoning continued to be flawed when you presumed what the probability of the Bills making it if they went for it. Again, because all the players and coaches are different than your sample, any estimate of the probability of making it is going to be at best a rough guess.
One of the most important strategic principles involved in protecting a lead is to eliminate (or at least limit) the number of unknown or random elements. In this case, going for it adds a random element (the outcome) , so from a strategic point of view the proper choice is to eliminate that element by kicking the FG, which is essentially a sure thing.
-
The link I provided in my previous post explained it. If you google "NFL blackout Syracuse Yates County" you'll get plenty of supporting evidence. I also specifically recall someone suggesting moving the county boundary back when this first happened.Never heard anything about county lines in the blackout rule. Like you to point me to the chapter and verse on that. If the signal cannot be received within 75 miles of the stadium it's blacked out. That's the operative rule I'm familiar with. BTW, because channel 5 signal is digital and broadcast from a lower antenna, their range is about 85% of analog days'Also, in my previous post I had a brain cramp. I had forgotten that OTA analog signals don't exist any more. You might be able to build a legitimate case that the rule shouldn't apply because of that. Penn Yan appears to be the closest town to Syracuse within Yates County. I went to antennaweb.org and checked what was available, and the site told me that you can't get any OTA signal with any antenna from there. I also checked their cable listings, and all the networks appear to be Rochester channels.
You'll probably have a difficult time getting anywhere with this, mostly because these days there are so few Bills games that get blacked out.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTVH#NFL_controversyIf CBS would care to check, the new digital signal LIKELY does not reach that sliver of farmland anymore. I emailed channel 5 about it a couple weeks ago. We need to get a class action suit going to get some attention. Or perhaps presenting the facts to our U. S. Senators would make a difference.First, let's make sure we all understand what the specific problem is here. There is a small portion of Yates County that is within 75 miles of the stadium. The other side of Yates County is about 45 miles from Syracuse. The NFL deemed that was close enough to pickup a broadcast signal. Digital, analog, doesn't matter. If any signal can be picked up in that county, and any portion of the county is within the 75 miles radius, then that signal is subject to blackout.
What would this hypothetical class action suit be based on? Your undeniable legal right to watch NFL telecasts?
I don't know what a U.S. Senator could do. The NFL is simply following their own written policies. If you wanted to accomplish something from a "government intervention" standpoint, contacting your state Senator might be more pragmatic. All they would need to do is move the county boundary a few miles so it's no longer within 75 miles of the stadium.
-
Because it's a CBS doubleheader week, Fox can only show one game. They can show the Giants at 1:00 or the Bills at 4:00, but not both.I live way north of watertown and we never get blacked out when the game is on cbs. But apparently they black us out on fox because I just checked and its not showing
Last Sunday and this upcoming Sunday, we only got/get two games during the day on Sunday, because the local CBS affiliate, WIVB, decided to run infomercials instead of showing a game opposite the Bills.
-
You can determine who has the double header by the starting time of the late games. The network that has the double header starts it's games at 4:15. The other network starts it's late games at 4:05. CBS has the double header again this week too.I don't know what determines who has the double header but CBS had it last week, so I would assume Fox would have it this week. So that would leave the 4PM slot open for the Bills game.I believe in the past the local stations swapped slots a couple of times. It is good for both Syr stations if the Bills end up being shown.
OFFICIAL GAME THREAD: BILLS v. 'PHINS 10/4/2009
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Yet ANOTHER screw up on a ST play. It seemed like that was happening a lot last week too, with somebody often having to run on the field at the last minute.