SageAgainstTheMachine

Hopkins getting punked by Dane Jackson and AJ Klein so far.

Wentz is a bottom-5 starting QB in the league right now.

This may be BBFS but given our still slim division lead the number of 3 loss teams in the AFC is...disconcerting.

Jags tied up with GB 17-17. This is a week to week league.

That "Tom's House" thing they just did on Fox was the stuff of nightmares.

Brightest silver lining here is getting a full game to watch what Dane Jackson can do.

It's a barely more complex statistic than W/L record itself and the thing it pretends to illustrate (luck) isn't what it illustrates at all. If I wanted to start an analysis of luck I'd look at truly high variance things like fumble recovery percentage, tip drills and wind conditions for FG kicking.

I love the predictability of people tripping over themselves to proclaim they've never heard of an artist.

The concept of Pythagorean Wins would be useful over a very large sample size where game-script permutations are smoothed out but over 9 games it's pretty much useless. In the Seattle game, for example, the game was 99.9% decided when we went up 41-20 but the Seahawks got a fluke TD and a garbage time TD that made the score look closer but probably did almost nothing to change the win probability at the time they were scored. So the notion of that win being valuated as less of a win because the margin was 10 instead of 21 (or on the other side the KC loss looking closer than it should) is garbage. EDIT: It's absolutely true that if you ran a simulation of these 9 games say...1,000 times...our 7-2 record would be in the higher end of the range. But saying that the AVERAGE result of those simulations would be a 4.7-4.3 record is asinine to anyone who's watched the games.

That part I agree with. I do think that there are pretty simple in-game decisions that don't qualify as game planning though, but agree to disagree.

Go Bills! But is every coaching decision that happens in a win validated by the win?

Yep, but in my opinion it was an indefensible punt. It made a tie by far the most likely outcome in a game where a tie ended the season.

To a certain extent I think McD is unlearning habits from his first couple years as HC when the Bills had a lot of heart but a remarkably untalented roster. We were 15-17 in those two seasons and probably had a talent edge in 5 of those games. It was very impressive but I think he learned to "stay off the freeway" in order to win and is just now realizing that we're now one of the talented teams. Probably the most furious I've been about a coaching decision is when he punted with 3 minutes left in OT in the Indy snow game when tying essentially meant missing the playoffs. I'll be happy when the propensity for that kind of thing is completely scrubbed and I do believe he's getting there.

What I saw in the Seattle game was a recognition that we'd be screwed if we put up fewer than 35 points due to how Wilson and Metcalf had been rolling opponents this year, so the risk taking on defense got stepped up and it worked. Hard to know if it was also motivated by the good conditions and how confident they were about Josh moving the ball but we didn't see nearly the same aggression against NYJ or NE so I think it had more to do with the opponent. Hope to see more of the same against Arizona with the caveat that you do not break contain against Murray.

I hope this happens for Darnold's sake. Seems like a nice enough kid and he and Josh are buds.

This was a good result for us in terms of avoiding Baltimore in the 1st round. Now we hope they both lose tough games next week. Not sure what their algorithm involves but Football Outsiders has it at 93%. A lot of these 3 loss teams play one another down the stretch. Still, a couple above .500 teams will miss the playoffs.

Not that they were going to make the comeback but this is an awful look for the Titans to end a division rivalry game with another matchup in 2 weeks. Just rolling over.

They've got one of the better overall rosters in the league but are set to be in QB limbo it would seem.

Man, they added that 7th seed but 9 AFC teams are probably going to be 9-7 and better.

Not Mahomes. Not anyone. 32 out of 32 GMs would take Mahomes right now and while I can't blame them they're all wrong.

PFF is aptly named because it's the sound I make with my mouth whenever they're brought up. Justin Jefferson is an awesome rookie, maybe even OROTY, but his impact has largely been in 2 huge games. In 5 out of 8 games he has 3 receptions or fewer. Diggs' impact is twice as big at least. Also, some people talk as if we traded away Jefferson for Diggs. Unless you can see into the parallel universe where we specifically take Jefferson with that pick, we traded the pick.

Stevie Johnson used to avoid contact contextually - dipping out of bounds instead of struggling for another couple yards was a signature and it was part of the reason he had 3 consecutive 1,000 yard seasons while playing 48 out of 48 games. I'm all for it. The valor of fighting for a meaningless yard isn't worth missed games.

Worth noting that he made another really big play that almost nobody saw because of the power outage during the Dolphins game. You get the sense that Daboll will always have a gadget player so in the spirit of continuity I don't see why it can't be McKenzie for another 1 or 2 seasons.

Agreed. I think financial incentives would be great. Two third-round draft picks is such a concrete and discretely valued commodity that the NFL is practically inviting immoral usage of the rule. For example what division rival would EVER hire a minority coach from within the division?

Wowzer. When I first saw this headline I was prepared to defend it to the teeth, being someone who feels passionately about racial inequality and who thinks that there is inevitable bias in coaching hires when ownership is 100% white. The thing is, attaching DRAFT STRATEGY to this concept is the single best way to muck it up.