You're late...like the Cowboy's rally.lain: But at least you get to enjoy it for a moment.
And I called against them on the spread, which is the only thing that interests me when my team isn't playing. You should try that. A guy with a coin can do all right staying in the W/L pool.
Don't just be that guy. :nono:
He also called a late season loss for Dallas that didn't happen, but calling against Dallas on the point early wasn't that remarkable. The field is always a much safer bet than a particular team early. Heck, even in his heyday you'd have been smart to call the field over Tiger Woods at the Masters.
And when a poser, like little arms Craigie, is "right" on TOL, only once in 5 years, on average, on TOL, it's not that hard to predict that they would be right, once in awhile, again.
Not the same thing. If Houston could have played Manning on Saturday, they would have. Prescott can win.
That's pretty apparent.Anyway, guys who play the line look at guys who call at thing straight up like kids who don't use training wheels to ride their bikes look at their friends who do.
It's not far removed. They were winning with Manning on the bench. But again, a rookie qb, even one playing great ball, is more limited than a veteran with skill.
Absolutely. But at this point he's still the second best qb on the roster.
Difference between a high school diploma and a Masters...lawn darts and real darts...a Christmas tree and whatever is on fire at clefty's place.
lain:
Ceterus paribus, sure. I wish him all the best, but Osweiler is no Prescott, and anybody who could play Manning, even a limping hobbled Manning, over Osweiler, would. 'Not the same thing with Prescott and Romo.
I saw no difference between what Prescott did, and what Romo could have done, against GB. I don't think Romo would have won the game either.
Again, your attitude is apparent.
Agreed, but Romo at this point is about that much better than Manning at that stage too. There are some things that Tony can't do that Dak can do, but it's mostly as a runner. And Dak doesn't have Tony's grasp of defenses and responses yet, which is no slight. He hasn't played long enough to.
Close enough. You have someone on the bench who has more dimensions to his game. Brock had played well enough to contribute to the win. He had more physical gifts, but there's something to be said for that experience and the knowledge it brings.
I think you're mistaken, but largely the distinction is knowing what to do in each situation. Tony has at least as live an arm and that level of calm and experience that you just can't expect from a rookie. Dak's early performance was tight and I think it took a while for him to step out of the moment's gravitas. Once he did he was terrific, but by then he had a hole to deal with. Romo wouldn't have had that problem and GB wouldn't have been as likely to put up that lead.
To me that's saying experience doesn't matter and I think you're wrong on the point, but that's the fun of arguing football.
You know, I thought you might have been taking that more seriously than I did. And by more I mean seriously.
John and I have been tweaking back and forth a bit.
I recall it like it was yesterday...or even sooner.
How would you include experience in a multivariate model to estimate its independent (ceterus paribus) explaining power, in determining between choosing to play Romo or Dak, and how do you not confound that variable with your own personal opinion, where Romo's years of experience is aliased with your preference for Romo?
I believe you.You know, I thought you might have been taking that more seriously than I did. And by more I mean seriously.
That said, as someone who yearly predicts by line and straight up over at ESPN, I can tell you that many more people play the latter, because it's easier. And every year I'm an average of two to three games better straight up for that very reason.
The Montreal Canadiens won 24 championships, and the New York Yankees won 27. In comparison, nobody is a pro football dynasty yet.
I agree, but the franchise won 11 of their 17 championships in those 13 years, while they took about 57 years to win the other six.
Your Steelers will be CRUSHED by the PATRIOTS