Ramius

While McCargo was fined for being overweight in the spring, he showed up to camp back down to where he should be. But I agree he needs to step it up big time this year. He showed some flashes last season and needs to build upon it.

PS2. First thing i am doing with the Bills is simming the first season, trading away all our good players for 1st rounders, and taking all DTs in the draft.

while i hear the complaints about play calling, you can't factor in the redskins game. in the preseason, teams do NOT gameplan for a specific opponent. They usually have their list of items to work on, and are going to work on those regardless of what the other team displays.

Theres a difference between not liking a pick, and then repeatedly hating on the player selected simply because you didn't like the pick.

The whole point is that selecting good players allows you to win, not selecting a specific position. All things being equal, focus should be on the lines. Thats a no-brainer. But lets not pretend that simply spending high picks on DTs is automatically going to make your team better. Especially when davce macbride has done some good research on the fact that good players on the DL can be acquired through FA and play a major role in a franchse's success.

Yes, but thats my point. Lots of people play the lottery. Some get rich, even more stay poor. You cant say that playing the lottery is a useful investment strategy. Some teams draft high DTs a lot and win, some teams draft high DTs a lot and lose. Which means there's something else behind the success of certain teams aside from simply "draft high first round DTs and you'll win."

I can see it now, "AKC the supermostexcellent © financial advisor": Customer: i am very poor, so AKC can you tell me the quickest way to get really rich? AKC: Well, i took a look at all people who went from very poor to being very rich in a short amount of time and i found out that these people spend a large amount of of their "paycheck equity" on purchasing lottery tickets. They won the lottery, and therefore became very rich. Customer: so you are telling me that i should play the lottery to get rich? AKC: yes Customer: but what about all the people who spent their money on lottery tickets and lost? AKC: i am not concerned with how people who didnt get rich spent their money. I am only concerned with how the rich people did it. The simple fact is that my supermostexcellent "statistical study" shows that the best way to go from being very poor to very rich is to buy lottery tickets and win the lottery. Customer:

Funny how you bring up misrepresentations when it was you that was outed for chopping up one of my posts to make it seem like i said something i didnt. As for the math, yes, you managed to successfully add, subtract, and divide. That ability actually bumps your posting coherence and intelligence up to a 3rd grade level. But everyone on here, including GG, OcinPhilly, Dibs, Bluefire, etc has proven time and time again that your statistical methodology is complete and utter garbage and is absolutely meaningless. Your outrageous claim that drafting DTs in round 1 = wins and super bowl victories carry no statistical weight, and carries the same statistical value as saying that having a coach named Bill meas oyu;ll have extreme success.

Seahawks cut marcus tubbs, who was a 1st round DT. Does this mean they will suck now, or does the fact that he was a first round DT override that? Or is he one of those 1st round DTs that doesnt really count as a first round DT?

You can, but you must follow the supermostexcellent methodology of AKC. 1. Make some outrageous claim 2. omit any and all data that doesn't support your point 3. ignore all contradictory data 4. completely butcher standard statistical methodology 5. misquote and make false claims about people who prove you wrong

If AKC had simply said this statement, we wouldnt be having this argument, because i dont think theres a single poster on this board that would disagree with it. The problem comes in when you pick and choose "data" to make a "point," that is based on some half cocked and incorrect assumption. Following the simple rules of statistics would have bee nice too. I can use AKC supermostexcellent methodology and "prove" that eating ice cream causes people to drown, because theres a fairly strong correlation between ice cream consumption and drowning deaths. Logical people will tell you that theres other reasons behind the correlation. AKC will tell you that ice cream causes people to drown.

Apparently your skill with copying and pasting is on par with your skill (or lack thereof) with statistics. Here's the quote genius. http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1013955 Nope, you didnt cut and paste my quote to fit your little crusade at all.

First it was first round DTs, then it was first round DL, now its entire defense? Wow, talk about back tracking. As for OC in Philly, he didnt say how he did it, he pointed out specific parts of your numerical jerk off that were utterly and statistically invalid. The bold parts below show where your inaccuracies begin. But, since you have so laughably demonstrated the lack of even a cursory knowledge of statistical analysis, i'd hardly expect you to understand the points he's making. And as for my WR quote, well, everyone has already seen your issues with accuracy, so no one is surprised that you cut and pasted pieces of my post to fit your silly, childish argument.

For references' sake, heres a link to OCinPHilly laying a beat down on the supermostexcellent © methodology. AKC has yet to respond... http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1036876

The Chiefs, Texans, and Rams are 3 teams that have spent the same, if not more "draft equity" on the DL and on DTs than your above named teams. Based on your numerical masturbation, they should have been 3 of the top teams in the NFL over recent years. However, history shows that they have been 3 of the worst teams over that timespan. Why then, were they so bad, when they subscribed to your super bowl winning method of drafting lots of high 1st round DTs*? *Not those DTs. No, not those DTs either.

Women's Beach Volleyball >>> Melissa Stark

You must be a miserable person. Why do you have such a problem with people getting excited about a team going into the season? Most of us are fans, so thats what we do, we get excited when the season starts. Just because YOU hate the coach doesnt mean everyone else does. You want people to pay attention to you? Stop posting like a fuggin 4 year old. Try doing some analysis of why you think they didnt play well and what can be done to correct the problems instead of your normal worthless drivel, which consists of nothing more than "the bills suck, dick jauron sucks, everything else sucks."

BlueFire, i believe you just cracked the code to AKC's supermostexcellent © drafting method: first round DTs that turn out to be busts aren't really "1st rounders," and thus cant be counted as "1st round DTs" in the supermostexcellent © method of winning super bowls. Too bad, because there are a lot of 1st round "non-1st rounders" such as Travis Johnson, Jonathan Sullivan, D'wayne Roberston, William Joseph, etc.

We got 2 3rds and a 7th for Willis. using those picks we: 2007: With 2 3rds, we were able to both trade up for Poz and then take Edwards. The Edwards pick was the pick we got for Willis. 2008: We sent the 3rd round pick to Jax for Stroud.

I can name 31 other teams that would gladly take the starting services of one Aaron Schobel. But you're right. a 10 sack per year DE doesnt deserve to start.

Dont we all? As to the original question, i am a bio-med engineering grad student, so i eat ramen for a couple of weeks prior to attending games.

Ahhh, nothing is better than making the frenchies eat a big old sh-- sandwich. SUCK IT FRANCE!

Sergio has me worried there for a bit. I thought he might actually have pulled it off and won the thing. But then when he went into the water on 16, you knew old sergio was back. Missed putt on 17 and the tournament was effectively over. Sergio is Paddy's B word. Also, Ben curtis' caddie should have punched him for hitting driver on 15 and 16. Stupid decisions on those holes and bad luck on 17 and his tournament was over. Basically, his play down the stretch mirrored the the success of the team's hat he was wearing.

So i was watching the PGA, and why is it that all of the morons in the gallery feel the need to run over to an errant shot and hover around it like a bunch of damn moths flocking to a light?