4merper4mer

Shocking….seemingly impossible……but true. Let’s hope he never reverts to his norm. I’ve been completely unimpressed with him but last night was a different story. He was great in the second period too.

I’ll reserve judgement on him until I watch his Netflix documentary.

Family related? I hope Diggs is ok because he is Jackson’s Daddy.

Since the Bills bye week have the 49ers or Bills played a tougher schedule?

You can’t really be that obtuse can you? And by obtuse I mean something else but I’m being nice. I included the 7 losses twice as well so implying I was trying to be sneaky or something is way off. Over the last 7 games have the Bills or 49ers played a tougher schedule?

No. I added up the records of our opponents in our last 7 games…..which constitutes after the bye” which is something you brought up. We played them twice. Removing one of those actually increases the win percentage of our opponents, so I’m not sure what you’re getting at. That’s ok I guess because it doesn’t seem that you’re sure what you’re getting at.

We played the Jets twice….chief….so I counted it twice. Whether you count them once or twice doesn’t sway things much since they are 7-7. Of the teams I called playoff contenders, none of them are more than a game out of it. Note that I did not include the Browns who are mathematically alive. Let’s be clear. Are you saying that the Bills have played an easier schedule in their last 7 games than the 49ers have played in their last 7? Because last I checked 53-45 is better than 42-55 but maybe I’m missing some secret Pats math again. Of the 31 non-Bills teams, how many have played a slate with a better record than Bills opponents in their last 7? You can can compare to 53-45 or 46-38 as a win percentage. I haven’t looked at all the teams but the number is likely well below 10. My Jets/fish comparison is my own, and I fully understand it is an opinion based on my own eye test. They play each other again and they both play your Pats, so we’ll see. I could be wrong for sure. At the end of the day you’re just straight up wrong trying to refute someone saying the 9ers have had a soft run in their schedule by saying the Bills have as well. It’s not close. The point you made was 100%, unquestionably wrong and you should just own it.

Hodgins?

That last sentence must have hurt. Nice play yesterday btw. I included playoff contenders as playoff contenders. If you want to subjectively criticize that in an effort to assert my post lacks credibility, then how about just looking at overall records? Of the 31 non-Bills teams in the league, how many teams have played teams with combined 53-45 records or better in their last 7? Im guessing the number is pretty low. As I said, I agree with you about the 9ers in general, but their last 7? 42-55…either 43-55 or 42-56 after the Rams play tonight. Net net, math is not your strong point making this argument. Side note: I don’t think losing to the Bills then the Lions constitutes free fall but I guess we’ll find out. FWIW I think the Jets are better than the fish but I guess we’ll all find out in a few weeks.

I agree that the 9ers are legit, but the Bills schedule since the bye? Jets twice. They are playing reasonably well, no? Fish and Vikes as you mentioned. Lions seem to be doing ok. So that’s 5 games out of 7 against teams in a playoff race. Add your Pats who are technically not out and that is 6 of their last 7 games against playoff contending teams. Can you find even one other team that has played 6 of their last seven against playoff contenders? I’m guessing there aren’t many.. Combined record of teams since bye: 53-45 Combined records when removing games against Bills: 50-40

I don’t think he is a great QB but he seems to be a genuinely good guy.

The Patriots play was more idiotic. That’s what was being discussed.

I need to hear the Pats radio broadcast of that. Still haven’t seen it on the internet. It has to be outstanding.

Not disagreeing about Lewis but if no one has mentioned it yet, the contest for most idiotic play in the last two years stopped accepting nominations at about 7:15 PM yesterday. Spoiler alert: Lewis lost the contest.

As long as he doesn’t do the same dance Dahmer McDaniel did walking through practice I think he can pull off the look.

The point I was making is that due to the laws of physics, we will some day be able to draw on 10 million years worth of tried and true space exploration and it will still not be practical to transport a person into interstellar space.

Did Columbus defy the laws of physics that have 14 billion years under their belt? 2000 and 60 are roughly the same when compared to 14 billion.

What I’m saying is that the scale does matter when the scale is likely infinite or extraordinarily close. That is the case when discussing straightforward transportation of a human to another star system. The laws of physics were never an enemy of Columbus. I’m not dismissing the possibility of the unknown becoming reality such as creation of wormholes, inter dimensional leaps, etc., but getting on a ship and traveling to another star as if you’re driving across the USA or on the Santa Maria is simply never ever ever ever ever ever going to be practical/possible. Ever. Unmanned? Absolutely.

Big deal. I knew Armenian kids in the 7th grade that had to shave their back.

I see what you’re saying but the analogy is off x10000000000000. It was one thing to overcome fear, and get a boat to sail the ocean. Daunting to be sure, but there really isn’t a comparison to the energy requirements of transporting a healthy human across lifetime years of space. We are only marginally closer to having that ability than we were in 1492 when you really think about it.

Space exploration can and has provided benefits that are used back here on Earth. A broader understanding of what is around us, information gained that can be re-applied at home, Tang, etc……. I’m not sure what specifically sending a manned mission to Mars will provide that sending robots cannot. The physics required to get a person to Mars and back in a healthy manner are far more daunting than sending a robot. Some say it is human nature to explore and I agree. Where the limits to that render it counterproductive is up for debate. Each mission carries risk and reward. Manned missions cost more thus have more risk for similar potential reward. The further we go, the more this is pronounced. SETI and the like is where the real waste exists since intelligent life in the galaxy/universe has essentially been ruled out mathematically already. Thankfully the percentage of money spent on that crap is actually pretty low, but every penny is a wasted penny. If I were in charge of everything, I wouldn’t be too far off what we’re doing but probably nix any manned Mars stuff for the foreseeable future. The ultimate goal would be to explore the galaxy and expand our domain, but not by transporting blobs of flesh around at enormous cost with little chance of success. It would be small dna samples on small self replicating robots. We don’t have that technology yet, but it will certainly be here before any Star Trek mumbo jumbo.

Comparing Eichel and Allen is beyond what a human brain should be able to comprehend.

My slowing down?

Agholor + Parker = ?????

We’re in America. No such thing as a bloke.