Ramius

Vick, overrated? bah! He just needs a better coach to kill, and better WR's to overthrow!

I understood your point perfectly clear. Good job.

great explanation in the posts above. But you know the moron is going to keep parroting his "there are more lucky 130's than unlucky 150's, so it will regress to the population mean B.S."

No, bungee is right. You and your posts are nothing more than a waste of SDS's bandwidth.

No, they actually say something different, you are just too stoopid to realize what they hell they are really saying. you dont even understand what the hell you are trying to aruge and i guess thats what makes this so funny.

Agreed. His gross incompetence on this topic has gotten to the point where i have almost pissed myself while laughing at some of the utter crap he's written. I'm going to try the holcombs arm method for my next presentation. I am going to not read or understand a paper, like he does, and then when i am questioned, i am going to say "its from berkeley!"

Once again, this response demonstrates your utter lack of reading comprehension on this entire topic. I point out the ridiculous nature of an implication from berkeley, and, instead of understanding a concept, you simply state "its from berkeley, its true!" The is typical of someone who doesnt understand what they are trying to explain, aka you in these threads.

Thanks, i know what positive correlation is. Berkeley was implying that the positive correlation had some bearing on the directionality of the scores when the test was re-taken. That was what i was questioning, because as you stated, that implication is bull sh--. Holcombs arm is just too stupid to realize this.

I may not have been able to persuade very many people over the last 50 pages, but at least I gave them a very clear idea as to where I stand. This means your efforts to redefine what I've been saying are futile. Now it's become clear that Berkeley, Stanford, the University of Chicago, and other credible sources support me. Your refusal to acknowledge defeat even at this point damages only your own credibility. 873335[/snapback] How in the hell does a positive correlation between test scores in any way tell that the person's second score is going to automatically be lower than their first? That may be the most assinine thing you've posted yet, which is definitely saying something. The 2 things have absolutely NOTHING to do with one another.

Only in your pathetic little mind. You won this debate just like your boner buddy holcomb won the starting job over Losman in august.

Its pointless. He still cant even understand what he's reading, no does he know the proper statistical definition. You've explained the above statement to him hundreds of times, and he still cant comprehend it. He isnt going to any time soon. Until he can successfully learn the definitions of error and variance, theres no hope.

The new CBA put a stop to this. You cna onyl franchise tag the same player for 2 consecutive years at the 120% salary increase. The 3rd straight year, the player gets the a salary equivalent to the highest tag possible, which is the QB tag.

Geno hayes played pretty good as well this season, although he was hurt for a good portion. Geno was only a sophmore i believe so he's got a couple of years left. The drawback with geno as a LB is he weighs in at only 210. That will cut it as a safety, but no where near the size needed for a LB at the pro level.

Tim Hortons has the best donuts on the face of the planet, plain and simple. I even convinced Puhonix, the dolphin-loving mexican to love Hortons.

You do realize that maybe had you picked someone worth a damn, like wade phillips, then your arguement would a lot hold water. But, mularkey was a meathead and an imbecile. There are mentally retarded 4 year olds who can come up with a more coherent game plan than mularkey can. And lets not even get started on his complete and utter inability to make and mid game changes whatsoever. If gameplanning was like raising kids, Jauron put the diaper on his kid, and after a good whiff of crap, changed the diaper pronto. Mularkey looked at the stinky kid, sprayed some lysol, did nothing else, and wondered why the kid continued to smell like crap.

cowbell can go to hell. you should be banned just for mentioning it. And no, i am not kidding or being sarcastic.

Who's the other Rich?

Its the offensive line. once you get a spot on the pro-bowl roster, its yours until you retire/are traded.

zach thomas over fletch? hellz no.

THAT would get simon to root for the fish, methinks.

good work as usual Z.

Actually, by walking into the stadium, and throwing a bunch of passes into the dirt in front of you, you'll end up with a 39.6 rating. its takes special talent and effort to get a 0.0 rating. Just ask rexie grossman and his 1.3 rating.

:rolleyes: <_<

You guys are forgetting the most important point of the article. Not only did he get a degree in theater, but he went to St Lawerence! Theres his problem right there. The old Clarkson "You'll work for us" chant rings true after all. SLU sucks! LETS GO TECH!!!

Let me add a disclaimer: *I'm not saying that the Bills should spend a R1 pick on a corner. Not at all. I'd rather re-sign nate and be done with it. But, for ANY team with a hole at CB (regardless of holes at other positions), they are better off using a 1st rounder on a corner than spending giant bucks on a FA corner. More bang for the buck. My point is simply about the CB position in general, not about the Bills. Specualting that the bills will be drafting in the 16-20 range, that puts in position to grab an OG in round 1 (the first ones are usually taken 20 or so picks into the draft), or a LB.