Week 18 Thread

[Mithrandir]

Why are you just blatantly ignoring information? We're not just talking about "making the playoffs". Are you so "dumb" that you think the season is over and all teams just give up now and flip coins and choose a winner? Do you think once teams mathmatically make the playoffs they just stop playing the regular season (the Packers could have had a nice long vacation)?

The football season is not JUST about making the playoffs. There is seeding involved which, based on the evidence, many teams actually care about. And rightfully so, they aren't just trying to make the playoffs, the goal is moving forward in the playoffs, and making the superbowl, and winning the superbowl.

This isn't hard.

It seems hard for you to comprehend.


It's about making the playoffs. End of story. Sure teams might think ahead, but every team thinks that the can beat every other team. Stop being so damn smart and just face the fact that 100% is the best option.

Make the playoffs FIRST!

We know you're so intelligent, but stop playing this ridiculous game of statistics. Kneel and you're in 100%. END OF STORY. Anything else is a risk.

[Mithrandir]

You likely misunderstood, I was noting that your last post was literally what is known as Anecdotal fallacy. Making a choice because of an experience or anecdote rather than the actual statistical data. It wasn't my subjective valuation of your argument, I'm noting the fact that it is the method that you were using, and it is a known fallacy in argument.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_anecdote

The actual statistical data shows that if the Raiders knelt and tied they make the playoffs. END OF STORY> It really is that simple. For someone so obsessed with statistics, you just can't get that 100% is the best option?????

[Mithrandir]

I read it, but mine had more details

We've already reminded him that the FG changed the opponent and he didn't seem to understand that it mattered (since he omitted that from later replies). So I was showing my work.

Do opponents matter to the teams or is it the fans or the bettors.? Playing the Bengals of Chiefs is immaterial IF YOU DON'T MAKE THE PLAYOFFS. And the bengals look just as dangerous an opponent as the Chiefs.

[Ken]

It seems hard for you to comprehend.


It's about making the playoffs. End of story. Sure teams might think ahead, but every team thinks that the can beat every other team. Stop being so damn smart and just face the fact that 100% is the best option.

Make the playoffs FIRST!

We know you're so intelligent, but stop playing this ridiculous game of statistics. Kneel and you're in 100%. END OF STORY. Anything else is a risk.

You are kidding right?

It's not all about making the playoffs. If it was, then a lot of teams would have stopped playing weeks ago. We know 100% that what you posted above is incorrect. You cannot possibly be this ignorant of the reality of NFL football. Intentionally obtuse is the only reasonable explanation.

There were entire shows on the last weekend of the season dedicated to playoff seedings and the different scenarios and what each team was trying to do. This is not news. If you have your head out of the sand paying attention to NFL football for even a second over the last 10+ years of football you'd already know this.

[Gregg]

Do opponents matter to the teams or is it the fans or the bettors.? Playing the Bengals of Chiefs is immaterial IF YOU DON'T MAKE THE PLAYOFFS. And the bengals look just as dangerous an opponent as the Chiefs.

It does matter to the teams. They want the best/easiest way to the Super Bowl. Evidenced by trying to earn the bye week.

In hindsight the Raiders made the best call possible.

I am just curious do you have a favorite team that has a rival? As a fan how important is it to you to beat them?

[Ken]

The actual statistical data shows that if the Raiders knelt and tied they make the playoffs. END OF STORY> It really is that simple. For someone so obsessed with statistics, you just can't get that 100% is the best option?????

It's actually quite gross that you are spinning the fact that I'm evaluating more information that you are (the idea that different opponents matter), and using that to suggest that I can't get a statistical argument right. You are either a) an asshole troll intentionally making an argument that you know is false or b) incredibly stupid. Otherwise you'd realize that argument makes absolutely no sense.



*** sorry I'm wrong, the option of BOTH a) and b) is still in play, I can't rule that one out.

[Ken]

It does matter to the teams. They want the best/easiest way to the Super Bowl. Evidenced by trying to earn the bye week.

In hindsight the Raiders made the best call possible.

I am just curious do you have a favorite team that has a rival? As a fan how important is it to you to beat them?

Yup.

I'm pretty sure my 8 year old who has never watched a football game would understand this. The fact that an adult who apparently watches football doesn't have the capacity to grasp such a simple statement is astounding.

[Pauly]

is this shit still going? Everyone understands what Mith and I are saying and everyone else in this thread would choose to roll the dice to get a better matchup (not all that much better I might add) in the playoffs at the cost/risk of taking a remote chance that they dont make it. Fine. End it.

[umjewman]

Yup.

I'm pretty sure my 8 year old who has never watched a football game would understand this. The fact that an adult who apparently watches football doesn't have the capacity to grasp such a simple statement is astounding.

Why hasn't your 8 year old ever watched a football game? What kind of Texan are you?!?!

[Ken]

Why hasn't your 8 year old ever watched a football game? What kind of Texan are you?!?!

I have tried, she is a momma's girl

[chancellor]

Do opponents matter to the teams or is it the fans or the bettors.? Playing the Bengals of Chiefs is immaterial IF YOU DON'T MAKE THE PLAYOFFS. And the bengals look just as dangerous an opponent as the Chiefs.

This is true. But I don't think the decision was a best odds/who will we play/analytics decision. The interim Raiders head coach was the special teams coach, and I think he was sending a message to his special teams players that he was fully confident they'd execute with the game on the line. Add in the enthusiasm and confidence gained by KO'ing a hated rival out of the playoffs, and I think those were the two drivers for his decision.

In a way, I guess it is analytical - he figured the very minimal risk of losing the game was worth the gain of building trust, enthusiasm, and confidence in his team going into what would be a tough playoff matchup, whether it was KC or Cinci. While football is a game of skill, it's also a game of emotion, and the Raiders coach sure banked some big emotion points with that decision.

[Ken]

is this shit still going? Everyone understands what Mith and I are saying and everyone else in this thread would choose to roll the dice to get a better matchup (not all that much better I might add) in the playoffs at the cost/risk of taking a remote chance that they dont make it. Fine. End it.

The statement I had a problem with was "Raiders were FUCKING IDIOTS for attempting that FG."

... they definitely weren't.

Then that was followed by insults about how I couldn't grasp the concept of the statistics involved apparently.


If you want to say that you don't care about what opponent you play even though it's obvious that NFL teams DO care, then I can respect that argument. But suggesting that Mith and you are martyrs is a little silly.

[Gregg]

Why hasn't your 8 year old ever watched a football game? What kind of Texan are you?!?!

The next time she needs a time out make her watch a football game.

[Gregg]

I have tried, she is a momma's girl

This made me laugh. Nicely played.

[Gregg]

This is true. But I don't think the decision was a best odds/who will we play/analytics decision. The interim Raiders head coach was the special teams coach, and I think he was sending a message to his special teams players that he was fully confident they'd execute with the game on the line. Add in the enthusiasm and confidence gained by KO'ing a hated rival out of the playoffs, and I think those were the two drivers for his decision.

In a way, I guess it is analytical - he figured the very minimal risk of losing the game was worth the gain of building trust, enthusiasm, and confidence in his team going into what would be a tough playoff matchup, whether it was KC or Cinci. While football is a game of skill, it's also a game of emotion, and the Raiders coach sure banked some big emotion points with that decision.

The rival thing is very important. Especially to A-type personalities, which they all are.