Neo

9:25

Another question. Where would Allen rank in ‘90-‘92. I’d take him over everyone.

I’ve had the same thought. The curse of the database. Signed, Neo The first person with a three letter screen name beginning with an “N’ followed by two vowels reading this while wearing boxer shorts and reclining on a sofa covered by a hand made quilt purchased at a church auction.

Did you see and hear the audience?

QB sneak, QB sneak, QB sneak.

Absolutely. In fact, I’d “prefer” to play the King.

Can I say Q.E.D.? Does that apply to an explanation with as well as a proof? ChatGPT says I can. Yes, you can use “Q.E.D.” after an explanation, though it’s more formal and typically associated with mathematical or logical proofs. Q.E.D. is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase “quod erat demonstrandum”, which means “that which was to be demonstrated.” It’s traditionally placed at the end of a proof to signify that the argument or reasoning has been completed as intended. In non-mathematical contexts, you could use “Q.E.D.” humorously, rhetorically, or for emphasis after an explanation, especially if you feel it resolves a question definitively. For example: • “Since he arrived before the scheduled time, we can safely conclude he’s punctual. Q.E.D.” This usage works best if you’re aiming for a touch of formality, intellectual flair, or even a lighthearted nod to its origins. However, in casual conversations, it might come off as overly formal or out of place.

Because while it’s possible to lose at home, and while every team in every sport with meaningful number of playoffs games has lost at home, it’s generally agreed by everyone in sport that it’s an advantage to play at home. The Bills have lost at home. They are still more likely to advance in home games than road games. It didn’t happen once doesn’t trump it does happen often.

Pretty sure Josh’s “winner” reputation exceeds Saquan’s. Barkley’s having a great year. What Allen did today will only advance Allen’s cause.

A few weeks ago, McDermott put the game in the hands of his offense. The Bills beat the Chiefs. Today, he had a chance to do that by declining the penalty and allowing a shorter field goal. He chose his defense and an extra down for the Rams.

Pointing out that any quarterback throws several poor passes in a row, while not pointing out the spectacular nature of a five TD performance, seems to one of the oddest ‘forrest for the trees’ approaches to analysis i can think of.

For all the doom and gloom, we’re a botched punt away from the lead. That will disturb a few.

I seem to recall a “oh, we’re going to get that Allen” post earlier today. Poster was correct. We’re getting that Allen, again.

He single handily got them there. I’d argue handing it to a RB would be just as “cheap,” although that’s not a word I’d use.

For all the doom and gloom, this a 3 point plus a blocked punt game. I know blocked punts count. It’s closer than the dialogue indicates.