Mr. Fussnputz Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 2 hours ago, MacReady said: Dead cap doesn't get added into the QB cap hit. Because why would it? Dead cap is dead. It's like counting injured players. Jokes aside, cap hit counts. I just got sick of people acting like the Rams proved the theory is wrong. It's not wrong. There is a number you aim to keep your quarterback's cap hit below. Nobody understands hyperbole here and they like to act like I've said it's impossible. Clearly it's not impossible. It's like posting online, "You cannot survive a fall from an airplane without a parachute." You'll have ten thousand people respond, "DeR Vesna Vulovic did it!" Then you'll say, "Okay, do you think jumping from a plane without a parachute is a good idea?" "Vesna Vulovic did it!" "Out of 487 failed parachutes, 486 people have died. Would you recommend jumping out of an airplane with a faulty parachute?" "Vesna Vulovic survived!" "Do you want to have a conversation about this?" "Vesna Vulovic survived!" I understand my style is very stubborn and to the point and I rub a lot of people the wrong way. When I look at something with a 29/1 failure rating, I tend to say, "You can't do this." Other people repeat, "It can be done and it has no bearing!" It gets old. They're so desperate to disprove a theory because they know I'm right, yet they hate that I'm right so they point to the exceptions and say the whole theory is wrong because of the exceptions. In the case of Mahomes, yep. That was the exception. Mahomes had an incredible postseason. His team still won three games by a field goal and a single solitary mistake wipes it out. The Rams had a massive dead cap. They overcame it by mortgaging their entire future, betting the prime of several elite players and trading away two years worth of draft classes. They're five years away from competing again. Minimum. They also had three games decided by a field goal. It's not an ideal approach. So when I say it can't be done I mean it in the same way one cannot survive a fall from an airplane without a parachute, and some people take offense to that. A guy named Popper had the idea that one counter example was enough to falsify a theory. But that's not true. In science, if a theory has strong predictive value, one counter example is not enough to discard the theory. It may mean you might want to tinker* with the theory to account for the counter example, or you might just ignore the counter example for the time being. If a lot of counter examples are found, then it may be time to develop a new theory. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas Kuhn explains all that. So, one counter example (Mahomes) may weaken the MacReady Hypothesis, but it doesn't falsify it. If its predictive accuracy is strong enough, it may not even need to be tinkered with. In other words sheet happens. Don't throw out the baby with the bath water. *I suggested a formula where the QB cap from two competing teams can be plugged in to find out the probability of each team winning. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 If by "tinker" you mean actually count the allocated numbers, then I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrILL! Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 Can't believe there are only 3 games left. Feels like we wait an eternity for the season to begin and then it goes by so quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 I still haven't gotten past the reality that this GB team kind of pissed away a legit shot at getting to the SB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 4 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said: I still haven't gotten past the reality that this GB team kind of pissed away a legit shot at getting to the SB. Have to hope Ravens curb stomp everyone on their way to W. So we can convince ourselves we wouldn't have beat them either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beekay414 Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 12 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said: I still haven't gotten past the reality that this GB team kind of pissed away a legit shot at getting to the SB. Eh, it's for the best. We're going to hire a DC that's going to allow us to become a juggernaut going forward. Why win one Super Bowl when you can win them all? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 1 hour ago, Mazrimiv said: I still haven't gotten past the reality that this GB team kind of pissed away a legit shot at getting to the SB. I’d rather go 0-17 than lose a Super Bowl. This team was close. It wasn’t close enough. Imagine getting blown out in a Super Bowl game. I don’t think I’d ever recover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beekay414 Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 The Chiefs recovered just fine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebpackfan Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 2 hours ago, incognito_man said: Have to hope Ravens curb stomp everyone on their way to W. So we can convince ourselves we wouldn't have beat them either This 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTwoSixFive Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 12 hours ago, MacReady said: I’d rather go 0-17 than lose a Super Bowl. This team was close. It wasn’t close enough. Imagine getting blown out in a Super Bowl game. I don’t think I’d ever recover. I had a good laugh at this and with most people I'd assume it was a joke statement, but with you, well, you might just be serious. If you ARE just joking, ignore this post. Your statemet completely bypasses the importance of the journey through the season and the rise and fall of emotions as we all take that journey. The Superbowl is not the only thing happening in the season, just the last thing (for two teams) and a single point in time. If a Superbowl is the only thing of interest (which I have to assume, as you would rather lose every game than get blown out in the SB), then after SB 1 (in 1967, which the Packers won) the Packers have had an above average record 2 winning SBs (1996 and 2010). If you are under 30 you are probably too young to remember the 1996 win and have experienced SB joy just one time in your life. More than a third of the teams in the league have never won a SB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KManX89 Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 (edited) So what’s everyone’s rooting line for the CGs/Super Bowl in Pack Nation? Ravens/Lions? I know, division rival, but can you really justify rooting for the Niners over a team playing for and in their first ever in your heart of hearts? That’s why I ask. Yes, I’m legitimately curious about that. And nobody except Chief fans is rooting for the Chiefs in the AFCCG for obvious reasons. One thing’s for certain: if it’s Ravens/Niners, we’ll know this shyt is fixed. How the hell else do you explain the colors conveniently aligning on the SB logo again? Edited January 28 by KManX89 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 13 hours ago, beekay414 said: The Chiefs recovered just fine I’m speaking of me personally. I wouldn’t recover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 54 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said: I had a good laugh at this and with most people I'd assume it was a joke statement, but with you, well, you might just be serious. If you ARE just joking, ignore this post. Your statemet completely bypasses the importance of the journey through the season and the rise and fall of emotions as we all take that journey. The Superbowl is not the only thing happening in the season, just the last thing (for two teams) and a single point in time. If a Superbowl is the only thing of interest (which I have to assume, as you would rather lose every game than get blown out in the SB), then after SB 1 (in 1967, which the Packers won) the Packers have had an above average record 2 winning SBs (1996 and 2010). If you are under 30 you are probably too young to remember the 1996 win and have experienced SB joy just one time in your life. More than a third of the teams in the league have never won a SB. Listen, I’m not normal. I haven’t taken a vacation in ten years because the last time I took one all I could think was I had to go back to work anyway, so why should I enjoy this vacation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted January 28 Author Share Posted January 28 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 54 minutes ago, KManX89 said: So what’s everyone’s rooting line for the CGs/Super Bowl in Pack Nation? Ravens/Lions? I know, division rival, but can you really justify rooting for the Niners over a team playing for and in their first ever in your heart of hearts? That’s why I ask. Yes, I’m legitimately curious about that. And nobody except Chief fans is rooting for the Chiefs in the AFCCG for obvious reasons. One thing’s for certain: if it’s Ravens/Niners, we’ll know this shyt is fixed. How the hell else do you explain the colors conveniently aligning on the SB logo again? Ravens number 1 by a long shot. Then reluctantly Detroit. Followed by kansas City. I won't be mad if either of those two win, but I would rather that they didn't. Do not want the 49ers to win. 9ers are creeping up on Minnesota for my second most hated team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.