OCinBuffalo

I'm currently sorta stuck in your district due to my mom, so I got to watch the thing "live" = lucky me. . Being stuck here is a long story full of pretense and BS, predicated on me being unable to say no to my mother. Apparently it also involves a high level of match-making amongst my mother and her friends....which will FAIL. But suffice it to say, I will remain stuck here until the spring. Christ, the Bills game isn't even on all the time. WTF is that? At least we can watch the Sabres.

California, specifically San Franciso, remains the only place in the world I've seen 3 different individuals urinating/defacating on the street at 10 am on a Saturday, and that was only over a 2 block walk. I had to roll dodge away from one of the pissers, or he would have got me. And, walking with what was at the time a $4k laptop that had to be delivered to a client, on a street populated by 60% junkies, is on my top 5 unsettling experience list. My fear wasn't that I couldn't take any of them, it's that if I had to, they might bleed on me/infect me with something. I understand not judging an entire state on 1, 2-block walk. However, I also understand only ever seeing one set of ridiculously awful behavior/set of people, in one town, no others, and my sample size is more cities than I care to remember, 30 states, and 5 foreign countries. As far as Detroit goes: there's a lot of good people there actually. But, what's going on there is literally the same story in every Democratically controlled city. What's interesting is: Bankruptcy seems to be forcing....competence, and responsibility, and accountability...on Detroit. Detroit may end up being the Gettysburg of this entire mess, where, after accountability has lost battle after battle to corruption predicated on nonsense ideology, accountability finally holds the left flank, then the center, and wins.

Look, I know this race is hardly interesting as Reed"R"(EDIT: Protip = you can't put R in parenthisis or you get the R for registered trademark ) is likely to wipe the floor with this lady, but, I watched. .....for 5 minutes, because of these 2 quotes by Martha 1. "I'm not a scientist, therefore I don't know anything about fracking" followed 1 sentence later by "I could debate fracking all day." :lol:(Btw, I'm considering this as a new sig. What do you think? Something along the lines of "Democrat Party's Position on Fracking, Explained by Martha Robertson: ...." ) 2. "Tom Reed is part of the war on women" Reed: "I have 8 older sisters and a single mom, and you're saying I don't care about women?" This poor lady looked like an utter moron. She kept telling these stories to nowhere...about what her dad did for a job leading to...non sequitor, because I'm still not sure how any of that ties into spending or taxes, or anything other than a seemingly pleasant old lady rememembering her father. Then, there was the time when "everybody was suing everybody". Boy, what a fine chestnut of a story that was. I feel sorry for Ithaca, if this is the best they have to offer. I stopped watching after that story, and I didn't watch from the beginning, because I expected as much from this. However, I thought the 2 quotes were worth posting, for humor's sake alone. When the phrase "war on women" left her lips, the entire crowd laughed, loudly, for about 2 seconds. And, that's important to me, as it proves not everybody is this country is so naive as to fall for such an obvious political canard.

You presume incorrectly. The style is a neccesary component. Without it, the objective can't be acheived. I suppose I might say, one has to lift the rock, if one seeks to exterminate the critters that hide under them. EDIT: I'm trying to exterminate a premise largely espoused by a specific type of critter. This critter won't respond without....the style. That's because it was preachy, and please, only "a bit"? I'm hurt.

Yeah, I also used the words "propensity" and "mode". Apparently knowing the vocabulary of my own job, that I've been getting paid to do since 10th grade, and applying it properly = hiding? No. The reason why we use these words is simple: predictive modeling is, by definition, predictive. Any number of outliers/one-time events can come along. Example: Pegula fires the entire FO/coaching staff tomorrow. It's possible, and in that edge case, it's now highly unlikely that we go 8-8. But how likely is that? Russel Wilson, and certainly Tom Brady are outliers, therefore, we say "Franchise QBs most likely come from the top 10"....because that is exactly correct. Look: if I don't use definitive terms when I analyze a friggin linear process assembly line, or the daily wire transfer log of a large bank......how the F am I supposed to use them in terms of NFL football? But, I understand your problem: you've been affected, and it's not just you, it's now the majority of sports fans.....by the notion that more than a very small # of "Sports Analytics" people know WTF they are doing, and that we should accept most of them/their work, because.....analytics. Now I'm certain you have no clue what is happening here. And, no, it's not that "none of us would understand". It's merely that you've proven you don't understand. Don't speak for the board. There are a lot of smart people here. But, don't let me stop you. Please continue.

First let me state, out of respect for you Bill, I waited for the(I think it's ~5 minutes) to respond to you so that this response wouldn't be added to what is above. You deserve better than to be lumped in with them. I fail to see how injury stands alone as a reasonable objection. Anyone can get injured at any time. We just experienced that this weekend. Btw, I know you hate Spiller, but, ask yourself: how much did you really hate him at yard 40 of that 52 yard run? This sort of goes back to the age-old debate you and I have been having since I joined this board: skill players vs. fat guys. (And you know I said that just for you!) For 9 years, my point has only been continuously reinforced: this has become of a game of what I call the critical .5 second after the snap. In that time, a WR/TE/RB is going to beat a CB/LB/S, or not. Whoever wins the most .5 second battles is going to win the game. It used to be that the 2 second battle between lineman was the key pattern. It's still important, but it's now less important than the ,5 second battle. When I was at the Pats game, watching Sammy exclusively, he won the .5 second battle on almost every play. The notion that Revis "shut down" Watkins is hilariously false. It's lazy analysis by somebody whose effort began and ended with the box score, and perhaps "well, I didn't see him catch the ball, so....". This is why I've never been a 100% Moneyball supporter(and remember this is coming from a guy who was doing Moneyball-like stuff 10 years before the A's won those 20 games. We didn't even call it analytics back then.) You have to both see the game, AND, analyze it with PROPER statistical methodology(the lack of which creates most of the nonsense posts/premises here and elsewhere). And that's the thing: if you observe Sammy as I did, and accept my .5 "rule", then Cleveland was absolutely stupid for letting us get him. A player who can consistently win the .5 second battle against another, well recognized champion of the .5 second rule? AUFKM? "Value"-wise, it's not even a question. I can have that, or, can have a chance to draft EJ, Round 2 at 16? Watkins might get hurt? These questions/concerns become negligible, and frankly border on irrelevant, when I have a chance to draft a guy who can win the .5 battle 80-90% of the time. You don't think that's merely accidental, do you? No. Thus far, things are operating as designed. Sometimes you have to be a thief to catch a thief. Consider that...in the context of this thread. Perhaps you are capable of determining what's in my mind?

No that is not what is in my mind. What is in my mind, is what I wrote: "Most likely" and 'by a lot" Apparently what's in your mind is a single-year data sample of playoff teams is enough data to form definitive statement...in a thread that is predicated on PROPER statistical analysis. To simplify it for you: your post is doing it wrong. But, what's in my mind, is also what I wrote "Over the last 10 years". How's about you try reading what I wrote, and comprehending it properly, before you move on to the much larger and more difficult task, I assure you, of determining what's in my mind? In fact, given what I see here, that task is probably beyond your capability. Yeah....I'm the Douchebag in this story. Not Bulldog. Not the clowns at ESPN. Not you. No. Me, the one who always backs up exactly what he says, nothing more, nothing less. I'm the Douchebag. Hilarious. Got anything else. It's been a tough night/day, and I can use all the unintentional humor you can provide.

Once again, I will say what must be said: LA is such an awesome! NFL market..... .....that it hasn't had a team for 20 years. LA is such an awesome! NFL market..... .....that 2 owners decided St. Louis() and F'ing Oakland( :lol:) were better places to do business. (Has anyone else been to all 3 cities? Not weekends, I'm talking projects = months/years. That's why I can say this. I'd rather move a team to Oklahoma City, live off the college rivalry, and take on Jerry Jones in his own TV market backyard, than go to St. Louis or Oakland. Buffalo gets 10x the crap that Oakland and St. Louis do, but Buffalo is a much better place to live. LA must have something seriously wrong with it, when Oakland and St. Louis somehow make more bottom line sense.) I began saying this 10 years ago. I thought it was ironic/funny 10 years ago. You can imagine the hilarity I derive from 20 years of the same clowns, saying the same thing, hyping the same crap, usually tying it to Buffalo...and still...nothing. Hey, at least the tying it to Buffalo part is over. Ladies and Gentlemen, please. LA is a ridiculous place to try and do business. This is the reason why Anaheim...is Anaheim. But having said that, the entire area is a business nightmare. Something about "the rich". Oh, and by the way, you need to provide "alternative entertainment" for the people that have the "right" to attend the football game, but choose not to watch football. Does anybody here really think that EVERY team in the NFL hasn't reasearched moving to LA? It would be CEO/CFO incompetence not to have at least researched it, never mind created a preliminary plan for it. Any business as large as an NFL franchise, with their resources, always does these sorts of contigency plans/studies. I know, because people like me get hired to do them. We get hired to them, because this way, the executive suite can never be accused of doing anything "bad" themselves. If it leaks out, they can always blame us for screwing up. It's a nice arrangement for all involved: they blame us, then quitely cut us our check. We couldn't care less about what anyone says. We get our check, a good reference for taking the heat, and move on. You think Jerry Jones AND Bob Kraft, and every other owner you can't imagine ever moving their team....doesn't have a "Move to LA Plan, Created by X Consulting Firm, LLC" filed away somewhere? You think most owners haven't gotten past the preliminary/requirements stage, and asked the consultants to begin formalizing a real plan? Then you simply don't know/get it. What has stopped all of them from moving? All these owners, for 20 years? The problem isn't small markets, or revenue sharing, the NFL itself. and certainly not shoddy consulting work. LA is the problem. The people, both those in power, and those that keep them there, are the problem. LA is the reason LA hasn't had a team for 20 years. That business environment? For a large scale, public business thinking about moving to that town? I'd simply hand the client a single piece of paper with the words "We don't find this feasible at this time." written on it, then I'd charge for an hour. It comes down to a business decision, and for 20 years, LA is a terrible business decision. These owners didn't get where they are by making terrible business decisions.

No. This one is specific to the nonsense premise that we lost a chance to draft a 1st round QB, and apparently, has also become a training resource called "Understanding how the NFL Draft works: Franchise QBs"

Frankly I see this game a lot differently than everybody else, I guess. I see it as a track meet, not a ground and pound. Or, I see Geno giving the ball, and the game, away to us. Nobody runs that well against our D. I don't see the Jets dink and dunk passing/run game plan that worked very well against the Pats, working well against our D either. In fact, our LBs/nickel cover CBs should be looking to jump every route if they try it. That, and with no discernible TE threat(Amaro? In training camp his teammates said "he can't catch a cold" ) that I know of leaves Aaron Williams to roam free/double Harvin and/or jump his routes. Ultimately. I see the Jets testing the run, but failing, and eventually lining up in max protect and seeing if they can throw it to Harvin as many times as possible. Meanwhile, the Bills will do the same thing, try and fail to run, and then start seeing how many times they can throw it down field...to a bunch of guys. The difference is: we've got more/better router runners than they do, and our secondary is better. Their O line is better, but so is our D line. If either one of these teams hits a big TD pass, it's going to cause the other to respond with passing, not running. The more this goes on, the more passing we'll see. We won't see a team run until they get up by 14 or more. Bottom line: Clearly this Heath guy has been so enamored by Geno Smith's 4 quarters of few/no mistakes, he's forgotten about the rest of the quarters. It's quite possible that Geno hands us this game on a silver platter, just like the last time we played. In fact, that's as likely as anything else. What new thing have the Jets done that stops our D line from doing what they did last time? And, don't sleep on Bryce Brown. Shady McCoy said he'd be starting in Buffalo.....and now he is. For all we know he can run all of Fred's AND CJ's plays, and pass protect too.

Perhaps you should read your own post: you brought up the Rams. Perhaps you should read about the NFL draft with regard to franchise QBs. That you even think somebody would trade away a chance at a franchise QB for a 16, without asking for a hell of a lot more, is patently retarded. I probably should just stop right here, because now you're in firmly in Obtuseville. However, I will try to help you: Not only is it highly improbable to get a "no doubt about it guy" by trading up, because the #1 reason a team is drafting high in the first place is: bad QB; it's impossible to get him without trading away a hell of a lot more than we did for Watkins. Ask the Redskins how that's working out. /facepalm So now the circle of idiocy is complete: by trading up to get Watkins, we traded away a chance to make an RG3 trade? Oh whatever will I do? I won't be able to sleep for weeks, knowing that we lost the chance to give away 2 1sts and 2 2nds on a half-assed QB who can't read defenses. Meanwhile, we got a proven gamer in Watkins, proven BEFORE the draft, whose good attitude is only out-paced by his speed/ability? Look: it's as I said, this whole premise is silly. And, for you, this is like gravity. Gravity existed for billions of years before it was "discovered". At some point, you are going to discover the reality about this trade as well. So, at least you have something to look forward to.

Let me put this another way. Drafting a QB at 16, to replace the one you drafted at 16 is EXACTLY the type of wheel-spinning GM move that has been made since Butler, and prior to Buddy/Whaley. "These are the moves of the football team Bills, a 12 year mission to explore mediocrity, to seek out mediocre players to replace mediocre players, to boldy keep our team out of the playoffs longer than no one expected before." Yeah, you're the one saying somebody is going to trade away a guy like any of the QBs that have been taken in the top 10, the last 10 years, for a 16 and....what? Do you remember how the Rams got those extra picks they gave us? Does the RG3 trade come to mind? Do you remember the terms of that trade? You're telling me that a 16, any 16, could be used to move up to the top 5/10 for a franchise QB? With what? Seriously WTF. Re-read/re-think...re-something. But...yeah, I'm the one who is drunk? Yeah, that's what it is. No. I'm the one who is trying to shake you loose of this delusion. EDIT: Once again we see the effect that Madden has had on people's football "knowledge". "Most important position on my team, guy who's going to be the face of my franchise for the next 10 years? Nah I don't need him that badly. Sure you can take my #5 overall for your #16, a 2nd round pick, and why don't you throw in next year's 4th? No problem? Great! I'll draw up the papers right now!" When I say delusion? The above dialogue illustrates it. Those words have never been said, aren't currently said, and never will be said by any GM in the league. It's delusional to believe that they will be. Not even Mike "Trade my whole draft for Ricky Williams" Ditka is that stupid.

This is your response in a thread about the Watkins trade BS being over? My avatar? (And, no, I'm not going to change it, for reasons that would involve highjacking my own thread. So, no.) But, I will ask you this: Have you considered that bringing up EJ, in this thread, which is about Sammy vs. Magical Franchise QB, who "would have been there at 16", is hilariously ironic? EJ was drafted at 16. So....we should be upset at losing a chance to draft a QB at 16, to replace the QB we drafted at 16. Right. What is this? Your 3am free association time? I'm up because of ze Germans. I have a reasonable excuse. What's yours?

A real world example of the Translative Property: how 2 teams who play in New Jersey can call themselves "New York". Jersey people always think(or is it pretend?) they are from The City(Philly, NYC, doesn't matter). And of course Jersey people like Spags believe in ghosts. See, there's the real people who actually live in The City. Then, there's these other people, seemingly from another dimension, who often show up, especially at night, and have a tendency to scare, but mostly annoy, the real people...largely due to bad/ridiculous/unintended yet hilarious behavior. Thus, I am forced to accept the existence of ghosts, precisely due to the Translative Property.

4-3? Now it's dead as door nail. It's over. You were never right about the Watkins trade(just like you'll never be right about many things....fracking comes to mind). Lay. It. Down. First let me define the premise(read: nonsense) properly. This should take care of any "but I didn't mean/say that" excuses: Drafting Sammy Watkins, and giving away next year's 1st and 4th(note the proper use of math, logic, the dictionary, and grammar in saying that precisely, and therefore: correctly) to Cleveland, removes(d) the option for the Bills to draft a franchise QB in the first round of 2015's draft. This premise was as nonsensical on the DAY of the 2014 draft as it is today. Yet, on WGR and elsewhere, this nonsense has been said, over and over, by people who seem to struggle in their understanding of the Bills, the AFC East, the draft and the NFL as a whole. Need proof? As of now, the Bills most likely outcome to this season is 8-8. (I know, not a record anyone wants to hear, but this is about math). Please click here: http://www.sportsclu...st/Buffalo.html See the first "What if" chart, find the column labeled "Count", and understand that the largest count, out of 212k simulations is: 8 wins. Are we good? Let's move on then. As many of our informed posters KNEW on draft day, as Whaley said on draft day, our 2015 pick was never going to be in the top 5, and had a very low propensity to be in the top 10. This directly contributed to the decision to make the trade for Watkins. Why is this key fact so important? Answer: because the top 10 is where your franchise QBs are MOST LIKELY to come from, by a lot. And remember the premise: we're supposed to get a FRANCHISE QB with the 1st we gave up. Yes, I am aware of Russel Wilson, and Colin Kapernick. In response, I will remind the strugglers that Wilson was drafted with a 3, Kap with a 2, and we have given NEITHER of those picks to Cleveland for Sammy Watkins. In all cases, the most likely place to get a "franchise QB" remains the top 10. And, let's not forget the cause that is Sammy Watkins, and his now obvious effect...on the value of the draft picks we gave away for him = it drops every week. Given what we've seen of Sammy, it should be obvious that he himself may be a major contributor to keeping us out of the top 15, never mind 10. The Buffalo Bills have always had a minimal chance of drafting in the top 10 in 2015. The defense was simply too good. The O skill players were too good. The O, even in shambles, statistically had more chances to score, with shorter fields to manage, and too many weapons. This is why the premise above has always been statistically absurd. We have 9 games left, and only winning 4 of them, against our remaining schedule, I submit as a VERY pessimistic assessment. But, that's fine, it makes my point. Even with a pessimistic outlook going forward: we were never going to get the QB we wanted with the draft picks we lost. Now, we have a real, not simulated, record of 4-3. We cannot lose those 4 wins. If we assume 8-8, find the chart at the very bottom of the link, find 8 wins in the 1st column, look across to see the mode at 8 is 26, find the column heading 17-->as of today, we are most likely to draft at 16. (The reverse order of the chart) Which QB, who is better than EJ, would we have been able to draft at 16 in 2015? Answer: nobody. We already drafted a QB at 16, didn't we? This premise has always relied on the magical thinking that a franchise QB was going to get past the top 5, never mind down to 16, and that is why it's absurd. The Bills were never a top 5 team, very unlkely to be a top 10 team, and now, by the most likely #s, we aren't even a top 15 team. Now.....enough with this ridiculous crap. It was never right, and with each passing day, it gets more absurd. Every win makes me smile for lots of reasons. The tiniest reason I smile? It continues to prove the silliness of the premise above, and those who said/keep saying it.

Well I would have beaten everybody else in the league this past week. And yahoo has to do a better job with the business rules that generate their recaps. Even If I had started Eli, I would have still lost by 13. Losing is one thing. Being inaccurately criticized by incompetent business rules is quite another. However, I am now quite pleased with this team that was once an autodrafted JV squad. More so when Jimmy Graham comes back fully. I'll bee seeing you all soon.

Demaryius Thomas = the ultimate FireChan Peyton Manning repellent. Every time Peyton throws a TD to Thomas, I get more points for Thomas than he does for Peyton. I'm going to lose, but for right now, this is hilarious. EDIT: and he just did it again! I get 2x the points on these passes!

We're 3 and 3...through the toughest part of our schedule. Now, we have more than a few cup cake teams coming up. In fact our schedule doesn't get hard again until December. We have better than a 50% chance of going 4-2 over the next 5 games, and it's not unreasonable to think we can win them ALL. That means we are most likey to win at least 7 games this year....right now, not including Oakland. But even if that wasn't the case, we've already won 3 games. Which automatically means we AREN'T GOING TO BE DRAFTING TOP 5(what is it going to take for people to get that concept through their knuckleheads?) + Andrew Luck, Peyton Manning, etc. Were drafted #1 overall. Top 5 QBs are Top 5 QBs....for a reason. = Not having a 1st round pick next year NEVER had a chance of getting us a QB that is any BETTER than EJ. Seriously, what it is going to take to put this retarded "next's year's 1st round pick was going to get us a QB, and not only a QB that is better than EJ, but one that is going to start and play great as a rookie" argument to bed? It's completely illogical. Only an umitigated moron keeps talking about the #1 we don't have as a lost opportunity to draft a starting QB that is better than Orton, never mind EJ.

You know the stat that amazed me? Pats 50 yards rushing. Compare that to last year. And, if you take away the 10 yards Ridley got by their LT blatantly holding Jerry Hughes(IF if have time this week, I'm going to youtube every F'ing awful call/non-call in this game)? It's not even that much. In all cases, our run defense is 5x better than last year.

Horsecrap. Absolute horsecrap, and so is the premise of this thread. Nonsense. This is perhaps the most inaccurate statement I have ever seen on all of the boards here, including PPP. Consider that. I was at the game, 20 rows up from the end zone, and therefore I watched Sammy Vs. Revis the entire game. That's all I watched. To sum it up: I was making fun of the Pats fans around me with "Jock Strap Island".....because Revis was losing his, over and over. They had no reply at all, and keep in mind these were the same people that were talking smack all game(My particular favorite "Spiller is overrated!....right before had that 40 yard kickoff return ). But, all they had on the subject of Revis was: Silence ...and the sheepish look on their face because they knew I was right. Them trying to run the ball on us was also a source of much hilarity...for me, and also produced the same sheepish look. Watkins was 5 yards wide open more than 10 times. Not only that, Revis FAILED to press him all but 1(one) time(and unfortunately that was a critical 3rd down, where 0 of our WRs were open). IIRC there was only 1 other play that I would call a tie off the line of scrimmage. The rest of the time, Watkins made Revis look like Just A Guy. Watkins made Revis's vaunted press into a joke. It was hilarious to watch Sammy either chuck his hands right away and run by him, or step at him, and make Revis jump back. But the best plays were the ones where Sammy just ran by Revis like he wasn't even there. This entire thread is the opposite of right. The only reason Sammy didn't have "stats" (Have I mentioned I'm an analytics expert, and I'm quite tired of amateurs trying to do my job?) is because for reasons passing understanding Kyle Orton wouldn't throw it to him. Or, he held it too long, Or, the O line let their D line through and they got there too quickly for Orton to throw it. But, under no circumstances did the Patriots, and especially not Revis, shut down Sammy Watkins.

Let's make that appointment in either Allentown, or Elmwood village. This way, when I hit you with the facts, I'll be educating more than one 2 time loser/reason we have the president we do, delta bravo. In fact, let's do it someplace that has karaoke. This way, I can slam as many unmitigated morons as possible. After all, efficiency/effectiveness is one of the reasons I've met with so much success. I'll make up new fracking/Pegula words to a song, and laugh my ass offf doing it. OR, you can quit while you're behind. After all, life is choice. But please...choose the dumb thing. I don't get to do much IRL trolling anymore....

hey no for nothing but i have an in with a dude who has an excellent tailgate spot tailor made for a dec game. one side of my family was at the dolfags game last year,. he offers a real bathroom/place to get out of the cold for a bit...and free electric. i dont know if i can make the raiders game(my job requires that I live in terms of days, not months0...but with all due respect to hammer? this place beats the schit out of his lot for a cold game. And, hammer is the guy who turned me on to it. PM me if you want my guy's #.

I'm setting the O/U at 4 months on continuing "the fight"(read: nonsense), in public, with regard to Pegula and fracking. 4 months, not 6, because this is about being a not just a good person, but a "better than you are person" to these people. 6 months endangers that premise. 4 months, and not 4 minutes, largely because Bulldog will continue to bring it up on WGR. It's like the ultimate LAMP. No matter how many times we say "where is your proof?", or somebody who actually has the job of testing F'ing water related specifically to this activity tells us, like above....some posters are still going to try show their "commitment to better values than yours" with this. (Once again, this isn't about the issue at hand, this is about proving that you are better because you "believe" in something. Odd that that same people tend to be against religion, and dogmatic followers of...what they call...science.) This is otherwise known as being: psychologically committed to an idea. It's like the North Koreans. You can't get through to them with reason, because reason left town years ago. See? LAMP in full effect.

I'm beginning to think that the intransigence is not Barack Obama's. Certainly Harry Reid has a lot to do with it, but, I get the feeling that Reid is merely following orders. How else can you explain blocking literally every relevant bill from a vote? If Reid was making his own decisions, there would be at least some things that get through, or some things that get negotiated. Reid is like Sgt. Shultz: he knows nothing. Rather, the intransigence is Valerie Jarret's and Michelle Obama's. Everyone else has left. These 2 are the most likely source of the problem. He's a hen-pecked husband, with 2 wives. He's been put in the position of being told he has to "fight" against everything, and everyone...even Democrats on many issues. Yet, the solution to his problem is obvious: do what Clinton did. He has all the personality, but none of the internal drive, because he knows that no matter what he does that might make progress, none of it will meet with his wives' approval.

What is it about Cincy under the big lights? If that game is played at 1pm, that defense runs Brady, and the offense, which moved the ball up and down the field against the Pats in the first half, doesn't choke over and over. But, no, it had to be played in prime time, which means I had to lose. It's inexplicable. Highly statistically improbable, that a team that is ususally good(4-0 prior) can have such a consistent, yearly problem with night games.