The Frankish Reich

We also learned the the "md" in plenzmd obviously stands for Maryland and not Medical Doctor

OK, I shouldn't have to waste my time doing this, but ... here it is, in as simple/understandable way possible. 1. Let's use nice round numbers. Population of Erie County = 1 million adults. 80 percent of adults fully vaccinated. (We will set aside under 18s now because they are a very small number and weren't eligible until recently) That means: 800,000 fully vaccinated adults 200,000 unvaccinated 2. Assume 100,000 people hospitalized (I know, way too high, but feel free to reduce that by a factor of 10 or 100 ... I trust you learned that in 5th grade math?) 55 percent of those are unvaccinated That means 55,000 unvaccinated people hospitalized with COVID 45,000 vaccinated people hospitalized with COVID 3. Do the math: - 55,000 unvaccinated people hospitalized out of a total population of 200,000 unvaccinated people. 27.5% chance that if you are unvaccinated you are currently hospitalized. - 45,000 vaccinated people hospitalized out of a total population of 800,000 vaccinated people. 5.6% chance that if you are vaccinated you are currently hospitalized. 4. Do the ratio if you know how. 27.5 : 5.6 = 4.9. So what have we learned? - vaccines will not eliminate the possibility that you will get COVID and have serious enough symptoms to be hospitalized - vaccines WILL reduce your risk of getting COVID and having serious enough symptoms to be hospitalized by about 5X Why isn't the ratio higher? Didn't the Evil Dr. Fauci suggest it was something like 12X? Doesn't this mean he is EVIL and POSSIBLY PART OF A GRAND CONSPIRACY?? No. No it doesn't. It most likely means there are confounding variables. We know vaccine acceptance was much higher among elderly people, who are the same people most likely to have severe symptoms if they get COVID, so that 55:45 split is likely not evenly distributed among age demographics. And, of course, there are always other confounding variables -- those with preexisting conditions were urged to get the vaccine first (and qualified first), and, of course, preexisting conditions are a huge contributor to the likelihood that your COVID infection will cause serious complications. It isn't that hard to understand. Nothing I've done here requires more than arithmetic. No calculus, not even HS freshman algebra ....

This is just profoundly ignorant. If I'm not mistaken you are a gambling man (person). You really should know at least the minimum about interpreting statistics.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/josh-allen-patrick-mahomes-two-high-cover-two-data-11637552010?st=eszmchtgi8gx64h&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink The problem for offenses like the Chiefs and Bills is they thrive on going deep and aren’t as accustomed to nickeling and diming their way down the field. On early downs, excluding situations when the game is out of hand, Kansas City has passed 62.3% of the time—the second most often in the league entering Sunday’s games, according to rbsdm.com. The team that’s far and away first in that early-down passing metric: the Bills, at 68.7%. Typically, that’s one of the things that makes their offenses cutting edge and effective. But their struggles to do that against these defenses they’re seeing more often has weaponized their own styles against them. *** Allen hasn’t struggled quite as much as Mahomes in these situations, with 0.187 EPA against two-high going into Sunday. But it has also been deployed against him effectively, with the past few weeks showing how. The team that used it most against him, the Jaguars, limited what had been the NFL’s best offense to its worst output of the season. Allen, afterward, said Jacksonville used “two-high shells forcing us to throw underneath” and that he didn’t do a good enough job against it. “We’re going to learn from this,” he added. Fortunately for Allen, the next week he played the New York Jets, who apparently didn’t know much about this. They used two-high just three times against him—and Allen torched them in a 45-17 win.

Chargers' WR Mike Williams starting to look like our old Caveman Mike Williams, the "deep threat" we acquired for a brief moment before he disappeared in a puff of smoke.

Ben's arm is so shot, trying to wind up and still throwing wobblers like old Billy Kilmer, and in fact looking like paunchy old Billy Kilmer (there's an old guy reference for you). Yet ... somehow they keep plodding along with other teams unable to put Ben out of his misery.

Yeah, I was trying to figure that out. But then I just went "I hate Ben" and started enjoying the game. Until now.

Chargers are the new Bills! Finding Chargers-ey ways to lose.

Herbert is really good, and he got to that point really fast. Basically his rookie year was the equivalent of Allen's 2nd year.

May I suggest: "Would you rather be the victim of a surprise kick in the nuts, or would you rather have hot chili oil sprayed in your face for 3 hours?" Not to worry ... I'll double-post my Collinsworth Veneration of Mac Jones comments so you won't miss them.

Thank God you're not watching SNF. I mean, I assume you're not watching ....

You will love him as soon as he anoints Allen as the once-again frontrunner for the MVP.

Not to worry. I will transcribe any Collinsworth praise of Mac Jones, Bill Belichick, and the Patriots for you. I may even start a separate thread on it, just like those recurring "Chris Simms says Allen now playing like the genetically engineered son of Staubach and Favre" threads. 9:07 EST: Collinsworth suggests, Michaels agrees, that Chargers kind of happy that Miami took Tua and they were left with Herbert. More to come.

I thought posting a snarky reply like this, but I couldn't come up with the right pop culture late 1970s reference. I thought Donna Summer, but that just didn't seem to capture it. Debbie Harry is ... perfect. Congratulations, Sir Andrew - your mind is just a tiny bit more cluttered with pointless knowledge than mine.

You're right - a select text/quote error on my part. But the point is some other poster is just horribly wrong about 80% of life! 😜

So people will know what I'm disagreeing with you on? EDIT: sorry, I misread your take on Brown. Hey, we agree on that one!

Edmunds: I disagree. He was a risk because he was so young - by the time he hits his peak years, he'll be a free agent - but he's been really good and well worth the pick. Oliver: yeah, I wish he were the second coming of Aaron Donald, but he's been generally productive. I think I would've liked an O lineman with that pick. Bass: fantastic. A steal. Epenesa: with where he was chosen I think the pick was fine. I don't think using high picks on Epenesa, Rousseau, and Basham in consecutive drafts was wise. Brown: he looks like he'll be a good one, and he's already a starter. What do you want from a 3rd rounder? And Doyle was a 5th rounder, which is always kind of a crapshoot.

True. But I think this may say more about the state of the 2021 Seahawks than the excellence of a Cardinals team with McCoy at QB.

In retrospect, the soft early schedule was not our friend. When you have "the #1 defense" after 9 games and you've played: - the Steelers - the Dolphins - WFT - the Texans - Dolphins again - the Jaguars - the Jets for 7 of them, maybe you shouldn't be so sure that the numbers tell you something real. And when you start 5-2 and people are calling you the Super Bowl favorites, maybe you don't make the trade deadline deals you need to make. Maybe standing pat when you know the team has at least a couple major issues (offensive line in general, up the middle defense) wasn't the best idea. In Beane's defense: he hasn't been here before, in this "best team in the conference" situation, at least not as a GM. Another Beane -- Billy -- used to be fond of saying this: the first third of the season is to figure out what you've got and what you need; the second third is to get the parts you need; the third part is to win with them. This Beane probably made some mistakes in the assessment phase (the first third) because our opponents simply weren't good enough to expose our flaws. That caused him to think any problems could be papered over without making some personnel changes. Every other AFC team has its own flaws this season, but ours are looking a little more intractable without personnel changes than, say, the Chiefs. Or dare I say the Pats? Right now if you ask me who has the better chance of going to the Super Bowl this year, the Colts or the Bills, I'd probably have to say the Colts. If you ask me which team has the better chance of making the playoffs 4 or 5 times over the next half dozen years, it's clearly the Bills. Different team building philosophies (Colts: inside-out, build in the trenches, bring in a QB from outside; Bills: use draft capital for skill positions, build the O line and interior D line through veteran signings), different projections for this year vs. the upcoming years.

Yeah, I don't think it'll be the Bills. Right now it looks like we're just there in the middle of the playoff pack with every other AFC competitor. It's much more difficult to imagine this team putting it all together in December than, say, the Chiefs or the Ravens. We are more ... the Bengals or the Chargers right now.

Tampa was 7-5 after losing to the Chiefs at Thanksgiving last year. This was 3 weeks after they were blown off the field by the Saints, 38-3. Then they caught fire, never lost again, made the playoffs, had a couple of close playoff wins, and promptly destroyed the Chiefs in the Super Bow. Some team will probably also peak in December/January this year. I will admit the extreme upsets are just plain more extreme this year, but it's a matter of degree, not a whole new thing.

I think you could say this about every ostensibly good team. We've seen what the Cardinals are without Kyler, what the Packers are without Aaron, etc., etc.

You aren't paying attention. 7.66 BILLION total vaccines administered worldwide to date. 3.26 BILLION persons fully vaccinated. While some people fantasize about sci-fi control scenarios and worry about shrinking testicles, most of the world is getting on with it and doing something productive.

I told you - read up on the branch of philosophy known as ethics. You are adopting an extreme libertarian position, which is fine as long as you understand what you're doing. You don't.

I didn’t say “the science is still out” re kids and COVID vaccines. The science is most definitely in: they are safe and effective. I would like to see more epidemiological data about risk of spread among children for one thing. We continue to mandate measles vaccines even though an individual kid’s chances of getting it - THANKS TO THE HIGH VACCINE RATE - is low. Nothing immoral about that. You need to study your ethics.