Lose on purpose?

[4merper4mer]

4 minutes ago, ICanSleepWhenI'mDead said:

I think the bigger question is WHO should be the designated fumbler.  Josh has finally tamped down all the turnover-prone talk, so not him.  If Cook lays it down, future opponents will see that in film study, and try harder to knock it out when it counts, so not him.

 

How about we call up Gore from the practice squad and let him fill the role this week?  He won't be on the field for future playoff games, so less risk of future consequences.  If he takes (gives?) one for the team, so to speak, maybe reward him by making the other practice squad guys pick up the used towels for a while.

Do blocked kicks count as turnovers?  Maybe Prater can just kick into the line.  He’s probably gone soon anyway.  Someone upthread spoke about risk to the player so just make a guy we’re losing anyway do it.

[Draconator]

35 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Maybe I didn’t explain it right.  Forget individual turnovers.  There are two teams in every game.  The turnover battle in each game will either go to team A, team B or will be even.  So you have a 2 in 3 chance of either winning or breaking even.  The Bills have done that 25 times in a row or something like that.  2/3 to the 26th power is an extremely low number so the odds are the Bills will lose the turnover battle tomorrow whether they try or not.  2/3 to the 27th power is an even lower number.  NE isn’t great but they are better than NO and a divisional opponent.  I’d rather have a 2/3 chance at not losing the turnover game to them than such a small number like 2/3 to the 27th.  That’s why I think if things are even and we are safely ahead…….fumble.

 

29 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

It’s stats 101.

 

26 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Then why hasn’t Joe Dimaggio’s hit streak ever been broken?

 

8 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

This is actually a valid point.  I hadn’t thought of it.  It would be interesting to see how the league reacted when the player indicated he was trying to help the team in the long run.  It’s probably not worth the risk.

 

PUT DOWN THE PIPE NOW!!!!

[Stads]

[Goin Breakdown]

This is very stitious 

[Steve Billieve]

Why wait?

 

I say we do it on the first play.

 

Here me out guys !!

 

Put Davis in at rb, shotgun formation. Snap it to josh who is playing holder, than BAM Davis sends a rocket and takes out their best defender.

 

Btdubs, I'm out of work one bills drive.

[MJS]

Let's play a game without Josh Allen. Every time we win a game with him, the odds increase that we'll lose with him. So, let's get it over with. Just take him out of the game. Snap the ball to nobody and see what happens.

[WotAGuy]

2 minutes ago, MJS said:

Let's play a game without Josh Allen. Every time we win a game with him, the odds increase that we'll lose with him. So, let's get it over with. Just take him out of the game. Snap the ball to nobody and see what happens.

You are onto the right idea.  Josh has a very long starting streak, and sooner or later it will come to an end, even by retirement. Why have the streak end against say, KC?  Pull him out now, end the streak, and we can move on with all our lives. Maybe I’m just a pessimist. 

[MJS]

2 minutes ago, WotAGuy said:

You are onto the right idea.  Josh has a very long starting streak, and sooner or later it will come to an end, even by retirement. Why have the streak end against say, KC?  Pull him out now, end the streak, and we can move on with all our lives. Maybe I’m just a pessimist. 

It is an NFC team, so if you really think about it, it increases the Bills likelihood of winning the superbowl if you lose to them. That's how those NFC games work.

[eball]

There is no question that losing this game helps the Bills playoff chances. It has been proven time and time again. 
 

[PauleeeWalnuts]

I have no words 

[nedboy7]

I like every idea I’ve read so far. 

[Ray Stonada]

1 hour ago, 4merper4mer said:

There are two teams in every game. 

I can’t stop laughing, man…

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

39 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Do blocked kicks count as turnovers?  Maybe Prater can just kick into the line.  He’s probably gone soon anyway.  Someone upthread spoke about risk to the player so just make a guy we’re losing anyway do it.

 

That's still kind of obvious.  We need a more mooanced approach.  It's like when the punter wants to back up five yards so he stands there waiting for the snap for a full 10 seconds before getting flagged for delay of game.  It's so obvious that he wants to back up 5 yards that the opposing coach always declines the penalty.  What they should do is have one of the OL guys false start just ahead of an actual snap - - less obvious, more suttle.

 

How about this?  Which offensive skill position guy got the lowest Wonderlik score?  Have him spike the ball on the 1 yard line before going in for a TD.  Too bad we don't have McKelvin anymore.  After that kick-off return fumble late against NE, he'd have been perfect.

 

Wait - - SMH, did we have a no-turnover streak going before that NE game?

[QLBillsFan]

2 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

I’m not talking about losing the game and no opponent should be taken for granted but….

 

If the game is in hand and there haven’t been any turnovers, should the Bills lose a fumble on purpose to end their streak of games not losing the turnover battle?  To me, yes.  Why:

 

1 reason against is it would be nice to keep the streak.

 

2 reasons for include both proving we can win games even when we have more turnovers and also every week we don’t lose the turnover battle increases the odds that the following week we will.  It would be far better to have that happen now than against a team like KC.

I’ll jump in and try to debate this with respect. Who do the Bills need to prove they can win with a TO? Why would any team want to do that? The odds ultimately can catch up with the Bills even when they are trying to not turn the ball over. The odds are the same for not purposely trying to turn it over. It won’t lessen the odds in future games. 

[NoHuddleKelly12]

[transient]

I haven’t played this game in a while… I forget how many points are gained when a serious statistics explanation is generated in response to a sh!tpost… is it 💯? 

[Behindenemylines]

Drunk posting is a serious medical condition bro.  😆

 

We’ve all been there..your allowed only one though. 

[0017]

2 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

I’m not talking about losing the game and no opponent should be taken for granted but….

 

If the game is in hand and there haven’t been any turnovers, should the Bills lose a fumble on purpose to end their streak of games not losing the turnover battle?  To me, yes.  Why:

 

1 reason against is it would be nice to keep the streak.

 

2 reasons for include both proving we can win games even when we have more turnovers and also every week we don’t lose the turnover battle increases the odds that the following week we will.  It would be far better to have that happen now than against a team like KC.

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, 4merper4mer said:

Maybe I didn’t explain it right.  Forget individual turnovers.  There are two teams in every game.  The turnover battle in each game will either go to team A, team B or will be even.  So you have a 2 in 3 chance of either winning or breaking even.  The Bills have done that 25 times in a row or something like that.  2/3 to the 26th power is an extremely low number so the odds are the Bills will lose the turnover battle tomorrow whether they try or not.  2/3 to the 27th power is an even lower number.  NE isn’t great but they are better than NO and a divisional opponent.  I’d rather have a 2/3 chance at not losing the turnover game to them than such a small number like 2/3 to the 27th.  That’s why I think if things are even and we are safely ahead…….fumble.

I think this is just a masterful troll job.  However, if you flip a coin 50 times in a row and it's heads each time......the next flip will still give you a 50% chance of being heads or tails.  Past results don't matter.

Edited September 28 by Doc Brown

[BillsFanForever19]

2 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

I’m not talking about losing the game and no opponent should be taken for granted but….

 

If the game is in hand and there haven’t been any turnovers, should the Bills lose a fumble on purpose to end their streak of games not losing the turnover battle?  To me, yes.  Why:

 

1 reason against is it would be nice to keep the streak.

 

2 reasons for include both proving we can win games even when we have more turnovers and also every week we don’t lose the turnover battle increases the odds that the following week we will.  It would be far better to have that happen now than against a team like KC.