Can Someone explain to me?

[Off The Grid]

12-4 is a lower winning percentage than 12-3-1.

Technically, aren't both "winning" percentages the same - 75%? It would seem that "losing" percentage, namely the lower of the 2, would be decisive - 3 of 16 (19%) vs. 4 of 16 (25%)

Of course. But "Winning Percentage" is the conventional term employed for the aggregate Record, and Ties are applied as an half a Win. Far be it from me to defend Convention, though. Do you have a better alternative term to suggest? Otherwise, your point is moot. "Aggregate" actually ain't bad.

 

[Joker]

I used to have a bag of aggregates when I was a kid...before I got older and lost all my marbles...

 

[Off The Grid]

You need to get back to making threads about the future dominance of the Patriots, we have lacked the mad scientist-esque analyst around here for quite a while. Then again, you may've been pelted with rotten tomatoes had you given an optimistic insight after the KC debacle.

Heh!! My Bro and I were yucking it up big time, right about then. He sets up and TroubleShoots NetWorks for a living, and spends a lot of time on the road, so he often exposing'mself to the squealing and shouting on Idiot Radio to bide the time, so we were both quite amused at the especially strident tone, this Year, that the annual Wailing & Gnashing of Teeth that Mad Bill's Transitional Septembers produced!!

Yeah, I'm sure you're right: Had I come here into the Gen Pop that week and shared my Observations, I'm pretty sure that I'd've been CyberMurdered!!

 

[Jackson 2]

Of course. But "Winning Percentage" is the conventional term employed for the aggregate Record, and Ties are applied as an half a Win. Far be it from me to defend Convention, though. Do you have a better alternative term to suggest? Otherwise, your point is moot. "Aggregate" actually ain't bad.

Calm down, sport. My point wasn't intended to be argumentative. I was wondering about the value attached to ties. Thanks for the "half win" information. Sheesh...

 

[Dillon46]

the jets are a much better team then the raiders

ROFL That's like calling the Jets the "cream of the crap" right there

Seriously though why do people get so reactionary...

So we lost to a team that was mirroring our season from the NFC side....left for dead in the media after week(s) 4/5, then a 7 game tear through their respective conferences after the Belichick laugh to the "NE QB Controversy and the Rodger's "Five Letters People R-E-L-A-X" in the media.

For as poorly as we played we could've lost by 20+, but instead we hung in there until the final 2 mins with a legitimate shot to steal a victory from the jaws of defeat loosing by only 5 points in hostile territory no less. After all it was an out of conference game and NE last time I checked own all the tie-breakers that matter.

Yes we had no pass rush to speak of outside of blitzes and came out lethargic on offense but these things will right themselves with a healthy Chandler Jones, Beast-Mode Gronk and a thorough whipping of the inconsistent Chargers.....Brady will be very motivated, after the Cincy game I'll never question his drive again under pressure.

This team just has too much veteran talent and young HUNGRY players eager to prove themselves in all 3 phases of the game to let the season end on a stale note.

and finally the Rams showed the Blue-Print on how to beat the "Big Bad Broncos" after the Pats proved who is #1 in the AFC

 

[Off The Grid]

Of course. But "Winning Percentage" is the conventional term employed for the aggregate Record, and Ties are applied as an half a Win. Far be it from me to defend Convention, though. Do you have a better alternative term to suggest? Otherwise, your point is moot. "Aggregate" actually ain't bad.

Calm down, sport. My point wasn't intended to be argumentative. I was wondering about the value attached to ties. Thanks for the "half win" information. Sheesh...

Well, that was a bizarre response.

No need to get your panties in a bunch. I never suggested that your post was "argumentative", and neither was mine: I thought that you'd made an interesting point, and I was merely trying to add to it and ask if you perhaps had a better term in mind. It was at most a Challenge and it was above all an Inquiry.

You might want to ease up on the Paranoia...sport.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

Kate Upton has a better shot at coming to my house before the end of the season..then the pats do losing another reg season game.

Ya i believe...so what

 

[woolster22]

Part eof it, IMO, is concern over the final stretch of divisional games. Some on here think "Oh no, Miami beat us back in September" or "The Jets almost beat us at home" and are scared that an upset will happen.


The other reason why, is as New England Pride pointed out: The Pats lost whilst the Broncos won last night. I would point out that the Chiefs game was considered the toughest remaining one on Denver's schedule by some members of this board. Because they won it, a sentiment emerges that they'll win out.

Furthermore, after a good stretch of dominant play, fans on this board were reminded that yes, this Patriots team still has weaknesses. The pass rush in particular, has concerned a lot of people, and now the fear exists that the remaining QBs we'll have to play (Rivers in particular) are going to give us a lot of trouble.

Personally, I think it's a bit premature to start fearing for our chances at HFA. We do need to win out, it's imperative. But right now, I'm just concerned with beating San Diego.

Rivers isn't anywhere near as mobile as Rodgers or luck, the D will truly be pass rushing rather than pushing contain against rivers.

I'd gamble Ayers comes away with two sacks assuming BB gets his foot back up Josh's hind quarters.

 

[woolster22]

If Chiefs had even a bad offense and an average special teams unit they might have won that game. I think San Diego will be the difference maker one way or the other. They will be tough on Sunday night. Then again, their crowds kinda suck. In the end, if we get HFA and the Ravens aren't in the playoffs (not that I'm scared of them, but they certainly don't fear playing us in Foxborough) we should have a really good shot at making it to the Super Bowl. I feel like we're going to wreck the NFC winner if we make it there with a classic BB & Brady **** you game. Then hopefully BB acts like it wasn't even a big deal in the press conference afterwards.

Joshy could easily outsmart himself and blow the whole thing for us. See KC and GB.

 

[woolster22]

JEts game was a short Thursday night game. But it again will be the jets SB vs us...they will open up all stops but still won't be enough vs our secondary. MIA is at home and i expect revenge

Guess you didn't watch Monday.

unless geeee-no-thro has a come to Jesus between now and then...we might as well field eight defensive lineman, McCourty, Browner and Revis. That offense is that one dimensional. Okay, I kid on the eight lineman thing, sort of. But kid napping spikes would go a long way. He would actually be a three down lineman for a change!

 

[woolster22]

This is a Straw Man Argument, right??

I don't scour the Boards anymore than I dial in to Idiot Radio, so I couldn't say, but I pray to God that, while all Fan Bases have their share of Fools & Cowards, there isn't actually a prevalence of such, hereabouts.

01 ~ Anyone who thinks that our "losing" a blatantly and disgustingly referee-aided Game in Green Bay, where the Packers are undefeated, signifies that the Packers are the better Team is a Moron. If these two Teams meet on Neutral Ground with fair officiating today, I'm laying 7 Points, thank you very much.

02 ~ Anyone who believes that the Broncos are a shoe-in for Victory any week, after having witnessed our Evisceration of them a few weeks ago, is a drooling Idiot.

03 ~ Anyone who believe that the Broncos ~ who are 3-3 on the Road, same as us ~ should be expected to beat the 8-3-1 Bengals in Cincinnati, where they're 4-1-1...well, See Above.

04 ~ And anyone who still doesn't get the fact that Mad Bill annually employs September as an extension of Camp, that the Miami Victory then is therefore meaningless, and that we're probably going to slaughter those guys in December ~ I'm thinking "40 Burger" ~ well....See Above.

Our toughest contest is Dead Ahead, where in San Diego the Lightning Bolts are 5-1 at Home, including a Win over last Year's Champion SeaHawks and with a 3 Game Winning Streak...And the only thing worse than facing them, this coming Week, is of course facing us, after yesterday's officiating Atrocity.

Me, I think we demolish'm.

20 points or more is how I see it.

Love the veracity, as always OTG. While the zebras were questionable, we had plenty of time and opportunities to take the game, and GB certainly wasn't handed any points like the 9ers game. The Packers were the better team Sunday, but as the saying goes...

On defense, I understood the conservative play calling, but would have liked a touch more "free" rush. Simply to mix it up and keep things honest. Rodgers airing back there, making and eating a turkey Sammie killed us.

That said, the offensive play calling was atrocious at best. 17 rushes for 85 yards. Toss out vereen's wasted downs and we have 14 for 79. Blount and gray went 11 for 62. #$&*#! $^&^**/! $/^*^#!#&(£€=÷$!÷^/#=$!^%=!/^_%#! $$/^!!

I fear Mcdummy is going to f^/# us again in the playoffs. There is no stage too large for him to try to prove how smart he is by throwing all over a bottom dweller run defense with horses on the front seven more than capable of pinning their ears back and getting after the quarter back. Meanwhile he sits seeming talent such as wright while his tag along nobodies (amendola and hooman) see significant snaps throughout the game and at crucial times.

Wright woukld be a far better blocker/decoy outside then da...now that I think of it "DA" is the perfect nickname. You have to be a daa-da-daaaaa to lobby signing him for millions while pushing him in the field in front of emerging talent or a rational game plan.

I hope this idiot moves to Florida, he would be ignorant enough to think he could outsmart the recruiting process. FFS

 

[woolster22]

I don't under and why people say things like "they almost lost" ...there is no such thing, you either win or lose. Period. I guess the other team "almost won" but didn't.

In saying that the Pats are spending the entire week in CA, business, no trips back to momma or screwing around, they are going to be all business. It's giving them extra time to prepare and they are pissed...I see SD going down hard on Sunday night.

Beiber!

So much for gray seeing the field ever again.

 

[woolster22]

I am superstitious about my Patriots. Here is what Packer loss accomplished:
1. Rodgers chances of getting the MVP went up substantially. Has a league MVP ever won the SB?
2. This team was peaking too early. I would like them to peak into the SB.
3. Exposed the team weaknesses to the coaches. GB very meticulously planned their game plan and they had a QB to execute it to perfection. I think BB acknowledged it personally to McCarthy during their post game meeting on the field.
4. Exposed the coaches' own play calling weaknesses.
5. Put the comfortable status of HFA in jeopardy. HFA covers up many of this team's weaknesses.
6. Media coverage of this team as "unstoppable" was getting cacophonic. I was getting nervous. Will it be a repeat of 2010 - an equally talented team whose season came to an end at the hands of the hapless jets?
It could still happen, but I think the loss to the Packers will make this stronger to let that happen.

3 and 4:
OC!

 

[woolster22]

Technically, aren't both "winning" percentages the same - 75%? It would seem that "losing" percentage, namely the lower of the 2, would be decisive - 3 of 16 (19%) vs. 4 of 16 (25%)

Semantics, STFU

 

[Off The Grid]

That said, the offensive play calling was atrocious at best. 17 rushes for 85 yards. Toss out vereen's wasted downs and we have 14 for 79. Blount and gray went 11 for 62. #$&*#! $^&^**/! $/^*^#!#&(£€=÷$!÷^/#=$!^%=!/^_%#! $$/^!!

I fear Mcdummy is going to f^/# us again in the playoffs. There is no stage too large for him to try to prove how smart he is by throwing all over a bottom dweller run defense with horses on the front seven more than capable of pinning their ears back and getting after the quarter back.

I couldn't agree more. I believe that our greatest Weakness is the continuing insistence, since 2007, and with or without Coach McDaniels around, to run a disproportionately Pass-Heavy Offense.

3 World Championships ~ 2007's, 2010's, and 2011's ~ would've been ours, I believe, if not for the Giants, Jets, and again the Giants being able to tee off against a predictable Offense.

 

[Jackson 2]

Well, that was a bizarre response.

No need to get your panties in a bunch. I never suggested that your post was "argumentative", and neither was mine: I thought that you'd made an interesting point, and I was merely trying to add to it and ask if you perhaps had a better term in mind. It was at most a Challenge and it was above all an Inquiry.

You might want to ease up on the Paranoia...sport.

I was equally concerned about the configuration of your shorts, as well. Perhaps we both fell prey to the difficulty of determining mood from the printed word. Enjoy your day.

 

[Jackson 2]

Semantics, STFU

Back at ya.

 

[obgod3]

Beiber!

So much for gray seeing the field ever again.

WTF? What are you doing? Where you drunk last night? Don't answer.

 

[Off The Grid]

12-4 is a lower winning percentage than 12-3-1.

Technically, aren't both "winning" percentages the same - 75%? It would seem that "losing" percentage, namely the lower of the 2, would be decisive - 3 of 16 (19%) vs. 4 of 16 (25%)

Of course. But "Winning Percentage" is the conventional term employed for the aggregate Record, and Ties are applied as an half a Win. Far be it from me to defend Convention, though. Do you have a better alternative term to suggest? Otherwise, your point is moot. "Aggregate" actually ain't bad.

Calm down, sport. My point wasn't intended to be argumentative. I was wondering about the value attached to ties. Thanks for the "half win" information. Sheesh...

Well, that was a bizarre response.

No need to get your panties in a bunch. I never suggested that your post was "argumentative", and neither was mine: I thought that you'd made an interesting point, and I was merely trying to add to it and ask if you perhaps had a better term in mind. It was at most a Challenge and it was above all an Inquiry.

You might want to ease up on the Paranoia...sport.

I was equally concerned about the configuration of your shorts, as well. Perhaps we both fell prey to the difficulty of determining mood from the printed word. Enjoy your day.

Wrong. You alone inexplicably inferred hostility from an innocent post, rudely lashed out like an incontinent child, and now, instead of admitting your error and apologizing for your rudeness like an adult, are trying to "save face" by proclaiming that we both acted the fool, when it was you alone doing so. Good luck with that.

 

[Jackson 2]

Wrong. You alone inexplicably inferred hostility from an innocent post, rudely lashed out like an incontinent child, and now, instead of admitting your error and apologizing for your rudeness like an adult, are trying to "save face" by proclaiming that we both acted the fool, when it was you alone doing so. Good luck with that.

I've concluded that you're insane. Bye, bye...