iamshack

Was just given an iPad Air for work...score...doubt I really need 128 gigs, but hey, free stuff and all...

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 02:36 PM) Yup, the percentage might be 13% when they're at their own 16 to start the drive, but that probability will change with each and every play. Especially with our defense, and after the PF...i mean come on Trestman...I hope he didn't really believe that and was just trying to give the dumb press something to chew on.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 02:27 PM) And here I thought he was going to argue that by not calling time outs it potentially limited the Ravens play calling because they had to worry about time running out. Odd explanation. That's what he was saying about the pass on third down...he was able to eliminate 50% of the playcalling possibilities. I only quoted part of his explanation.

Additionally, the 13 % thing really annoys me. I LOVE that he is aware of that data, but I certainly hope he understands that those percentages are constantly changing with each play. It is a misuse of the data to not change your strategy based on events occurring within the drive, rather than to act as if the drive simply operates within a vacuum of a 13% success rate.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 01:58 PM) This makes pretty solid sense to me and explains why I will never be an NFL head coach, among many reasons, http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0,7332934.story I don't follow this explanation. This presumes you take a timeout after they gained the first down, then between first and second down, and then between 2nd and third down. Only if they run the ball on third down and don't score the td (at which point your concern is mightily lessened because this presumed they did not score the td, otherwise the clock would have stopped) would there be 18-19 seconds remaining. I like the idea about substitutions and packages, but I think he's wrong about the time.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 09:39 AM) Yea, his neck stretched an extra 5 inches on that hit. However, I still think the PF was wrong. It wasnt a blow to the head or the neck, it was across the chest and just made it look like a hit to the neck because of how cartoonish Brees looked when he took the hit His hand raked across his face pretty good there on the follow through...I think the timing of it stunk, but it was the right call.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 09:06 AM) Yep, that's why you gotta franchise him and then draft a QB and try to mold him. If Cutler is amazing next year, pay him and you've hopefully got a decent back-up with the pick. If not, get rid of him, and have McCown and the Bears future QB waiting in the wings. I wouldn't mind drafting Aaron Murray if we can get him with a 3rd round pick or something.

QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 08:44 AM) Well, you wouldn't retain McCown and dump Cutler unless you had a rookie/other young QB in the fold who you hoped to pass things off to after one or two seasons. Of course...the problem is we were never able to develop that franchise qb before...I wouldn't be opposed to trying it...but with our luck, we'd sign McCown and let Cutler walk, and then Josh would get hurt in week 2 and we'd have this young guy starting.

I was all aboard the Josh McCown train until my buddy pointed out that he is 34 already. I was shocked. I am hesitant to give Cutler a long-term deal, but it would take big, big balls to let him go after what we've gone through on the qb front over the past 3 decades.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 08:31 PM) Is there a qb you'd guys take over Peyton? No.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 07:52 PM) KC's defense is good, but it is overrated. I think I read a stat they they've faced the most backup QBs in the league. Hell, even Peyton has a bum ankle. Yeah, they are solid, but I think I heard none of their wins are against teams that currently have winning records.

QUOTE (WilliamTell @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 06:04 PM) With me being a beloved Chiefs fan I screamed don't throw a pick right after the Denver turnover.........I guess they listened to me.......Should've said don't turn the ball over. That's just football...nothing you can do.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 05:48 PM) I don't know that there is one. Any "advantage" you get by trying to limit their play selection is minimal at best since they have 2 timeouts. I realize that if they burn both and get sacked etc on 3rd the game is over, but again, odds of that situation coming up and then happening is so slim, you would much rather have time on the clock at that point. Once time is not an issue for your opponent, you immediately need to think of stopping it for your team. I feel like it gets lost in moment. For how many head coaches screw up clock management, it would help if there was one guy on staff on game day always just thinking about clock-related stuff within the last few minutes of a half and can help out the HC. I don't think it's that difficult...I think many of them are just stubborn about it and/or afraid of being criticized.

Really excited for this game tonight. Predictions? I think the Broncos will expose the Chiefs a bit if Peyton is reasonably healthy... Broncos 38, Chiefs 24

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 04:37 PM) At least for RF, we'd probably be hoping that the guy we acquired will out-produce Rios this year. I'd be thrilled with that, but I don't anticipate that.

Well, you've got no Alex Rios and no catcher hitting 26 homers or whatever; other than that, yeah, it's pretty much the same I don't think it matters whether we think we're going to be competitive or not; Hahn and are Reinsdorf have both made it clear they aren't going to punt this season. They're going to try and make moves that are good both in the short and long term.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 03:40 PM) There isn't any good logic to it, they just must think "oh maybe they'll run out of time before they score." When they have 2 timeouts on the 5 with a minute left, time is a non-issue for them. I could not believe he wasn't taking them, you needed an out, especially if they punched it in for a TD. All he has to do is think about it from Baltimore's perspective. A perfect situation would have been to bleed the clock and score a TD with 10 seconds left. It's really crazy how bad coaches are with the clock sometimes. 100%. Right...they're hoping to take the run away from them, which ultimately did happen on the third down. Ultimately most teams will pass there anyways, but at least it does allow you to play pass on defense almost at a100% likelihood. That said, it's not worth doing that if you give away precious time in the event they score a touchdown (or even a fg in this instance, as they could have had a minute to try and score prior to the end of regulation). I guess I was just hoping there would be some better answer I hadn't thought of.

Being a degenerate gambler, I watch a s***load of games...almost to a man, every coach does that s***...I'd love to hear the thinking...especially when the team on offense has timeouts themselves.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 01:58 PM) Looks like I just lost Darren Sproles mid-game, again. Unreal. He'll be ok

QUOTE (danman31 @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 10:02 AM) It certainly matters. There's a reasonable chance it could come down to a 1-loss team for that second spot. Not the most likely scenario, but it could happen. We've seen it before. Once you get that deep everything factors in. Well I certainly hope you're right.

QUOTE (staxx @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 09:25 AM) ray rice. bears run defense sucks + windy day = lots of running It also means 8-9 men boxes all day

QUOTE (danman31 @ Nov 16, 2013 -> 08:45 PM) So Oregon moves up in the rankings and has a clear path to the Pac 12 title game, but did their national title hopes take a shot due to their loss now not looking so good? I hope you're being sarcastic...losing in Palo Alta is not a bad loss...however, that won't matter...their national title hopes took a shot due to the fact that they have a loss, period. I don't think it'll get to the quality of their loss.

QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 16, 2013 -> 07:39 PM) It's more that we could see Ellsbury get up into the $120M range and Cano more like $175M - whereas 12 months ago it looked like it might be more like $75M and $250M I dunno about that...Ellsbury was pretty highly thought of outside of his injury concerns...I don't think many people thought he'd take less than$100 million

QUOTE (winninguglyin83 @ Nov 16, 2013 -> 01:33 PM) Tribune story about the interview also hinted that AJ coming back was a possibility. In fact, sounded like he will absolutely be back when his career ends -- in the TV booth. To work with hawk before he dies

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 16, 2013 -> 03:47 PM) Cause Semien is already better than Gordon IMO so he should be playing. I also don't think what we did with Beckham should have anything to do with what we do with Semien. Along those same lines, I really don't think having major league success when he got brought up is what turned Beckham into a bad baseball player. Let Marcus start the year in Chicago, work with the major league coaches and develop that way, I definitely don't think that's going to hurt him. He's a better hitter than Gordon and Connor already and he should be on the major league roster as far as I'm concerned. I guess what I'm getting at is that a lot of these better prospects can succeed before the League adjusts. That's when the prospect really proves whether he's going to be worth his salt or not. I think Semien could learn a bit more about that down in Charlotte, instead of putting the Org in the position of removing the incumbent player to make way for the prospect, then having to stick with the prospect after he fails to adjust to the rest of the League's adjustment. Do you really think Semien is going to put up significantly better numbers than Gordon right out of the chute? I don't.