I think I have made my point. It will happen one day, or a major injury will occur because of it.
If you are debating the other side, there is no other answer except you are a mouthbreathing moron who shouldnt be walking the streets alone, much less gambling.
Sorry, there is no middle ground here. Some things are debatable, this isnt, and if you cant see it - or better yet insist on debating that the sky is yellow instead of blue, have at it.
I agree taking a knee is a slightly better percentage play, however you could also make a case that someday a team will take a knee and lose because of it.
You could make that aurgument either way , highly, highly likely if enough teams do this stratergy eventually a team will lose bacause of taking a knee.
Well, historically it is 100%.
Can an earthquake stop the game before the second snap? yes, but I wouldnt gameplan for it.
You are a mouthbreathing moron. You are debating a point that makes no difference in this debate. Until you can say that whatever the odds are (if they are not 100%) are LOWER than the odds of scoring, you have no debate.
It is possible to make probabilities without an event acutally occuring in history.
For instance, a scientist can tell you that the world ending because of a nuclear disaster is much higher than the world ending because of a boy with a toy gun. Has the world ended before? No. Can we make probabilities about it? Yes.
Im not able to cite a specific time a team won because another scored in those exact circumstances. Maybe it has happened before, maybe it hasnt - my inability to cite a specific case has no bearing on the probability assigned.
I feel stupid for even typing the above.
Correct.
It COULD happen. I gave you this about 10 posts ago.
Are you still making the argument that it is more LIKELY to happen than for the other team to score, get the onsides, and score again?
That is the discussion here, welcome to the adult table.
I agree taking a knee is a slightly better percentage play, however you could also make a case that someday a team will take a knee and lose because of it.
You could make that aurgument either way , highly, highly likely if enough teams do this stratergy eventually a team will lose bacause of taking a knee.
Every time I think covers cant get dumber, the bar is lowered.
Congrats.
Penalties? Would not affect the ability to run out the clock.
I assume you mean a false start? Wouldnt matter. Not sure I really need to detail out why it wouldnt matter, but it wouldnt. Do I?
Next?
So you are telling me that the getting beat with a straight flush to the K isnt less likely than getting beat with ace high - EVEN THOUGH IT HASNT NECESSARILY HAPPENED?
What planet do you live on?
Planet Dope?
Then I guess the same applies to the vast majority of people who posted in this thread who say it isnt even a discussion that you are wrong.
I would like to know something though: Do you actually believe that kneeling 3 times carries the same fail probability as kicking off with 1.48 left up 2 td's? SImple question.
The lack of an event occuring does not preclude you from stating a probability.
You can piece together what it would take to occur to form a probability. For instance: You can look at the likelihood of a team scoring 2 td's in 1.48 with 1 timeout. Then you can compare that probability to the amount of times a team has fumbled a kneel down.
What is so hard about this?
Are you saying trying to say that you cant assign a probability to this situation because the exact situation has never occured? Huh?
I will say this:
If you think the chances of successfully completing 3 kneel down plays is LOWER than the chances of a team scoring 2 Td's in 1.48 with 1 timeout, then you should state your case.
But to say that you cant assume those probabilities because it has never exactly happened historically, then I will call you a moron (not loudly or pounding the table, just quietly, but you are still a moron).
And with that supreme piece of stupidity, I rest my case.
I guess the threshold for a miracle is low these days.
One different bounce on the onsides kick, and they have 24 seconds to score to tie.
Unlikely? Yes. Miracle? Maybe biblical scholars would argue that.
Im going to quote some of the other idiots in here who agree with me so that you guys can argue with them too.
.,.. class over..
For people who really understand the game, the right thing to do is take a knee like Westbrook did a few years back, but the reality is most of these guys have instinct to score when given the opportunity. Tough break for under bettors, but that is gambling for you. I actually saw a live line on the Greek at -2000 on the monely line after it was a 7 point game. That is probably the easisest investment. I risked $520 to win $26. Wow!
Today was a huge breakthrough in my relationship with my wife, excluding the kids highs and lows (obviously), this my have been the pinnacle in our 16 years together
It's been a shitload of years of my preaching and ranting about this take a knee at the one/let them score the TD issue. For all those years she has either looked at me like I'm a lunatic or gives the standard,, "What are you talking about,, they're now ahead by more." response.
But today she actually almost beat me to the punch by yelling--- "Go down ,, Go Down,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, awwww you fn' dipshit you should've gone down at the one."
My eyes got a little glassy, I could feel a lump in my throat, and I may have even told her that I cared about, and was proud of her....
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Off topic------ I think my next post is 1000,,,,, I've taken pride (don't know why) in the fact that I've never just posted a emoticon, or a GL as a comment.... I think I may for the big "1000" I'm going to do just that........
Stand by,,,,
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
