So, 4-12 predictors...how's that working out?

[Ol Dirty B]

3 minutes ago, OCinBuffalo said:

Yeah: I think the teaching here should begin with why somebody would make a definitive claim that "this is a 4-5-6( they keep moving the goal posts)" team....when...probability, odds, math, reason, basically anything didactic...suggested then, and now, that if they bet their house on that at the beginning of the season, when then made their claims, they'd be living in van, down by the river, right now.

 

Now, the question that confronts you is: would you like to know why predicting 4-12, on any NFL team, in any NFL season, is a loser's bet? Or, do you want to keep living in your van, down by the river?

 

Their over under wasn't 4.5 wins... So that was never a bet, anyone ever made this year. He also didn't bet money on 4 wins I'm guessing.

 

Do you suffer from some kind of personality disorder?  You truly are odd.

Edited December 15, 2017 by Ol Dirty B

[OCinBuffalo]

13 minutes ago, Ol Dirty B said:

 

I know we've disagreed before... but this dude is just delusional. I got some insults for him, but I just try not to stoop to that level but I can think of a few things ailing him.

 

The guy has some serious confidence issues. I'll just leave it at that. He's certifiably nuts. That's the first time I've ever felt that about someone on here. I mean just not like wow you're a homer nuts, or I completely disagree with you, I think you're nuts.

 

He is on some hearing voices level of nuts.

Blah blah. 

 

Respond to the substance of the post. The trouble is: you can't, can you? The material my assertions are based on should, and I use that word cautiously given today's education system, be available to review in any 11th grade math textbook. We're not doing differential equations here. This is basic probability. The very nature of the NFL means, with regards to schedule prediction/playoff odds, the material in that textbook is all that is required.

 

So, are you forgetting your 11th grade math...or....

15 minutes ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:

 

I predicted the Bills would win less than 7 games, based on the new staff and our weaknesses, and I was wrong. Cool. This guy takes that to a whole new level, as if his whole life depended on him being right, which is odd indeed.

 

I know I can be opinionated as hell, but predictions are just that. Not one of us are Nostradamus to be sure. LOL

My point, as simply as I can state it is: that's not what far too many on this board were claiming in September. They in essence, in terms of predicting the season, were not only claiming to be direct decedents of Nostradamus, but to have also created the Philosopher's Stone, figured out Mona Lisa's smile, and to have solved all the Borgia Murders.

 

They "knew" this was a 4-12 team. No, this is at worst a 7-9 team. Wrong is wrong, but definitively screaming from the church spires that you know 4-12...that's idiocy.

[Ol Dirty B]

12 minutes ago, OCinBuffalo said:

Blah blah. 

 

Respond to the substance of the post. The trouble is: you can't, can you? The material my assertions are based on should, and I use that word cautiously given today's education system, be available to review in any 11th grade math textbook. We're not doing differential equations here. This is basic probability. The very nature of the NFL means, with regards to schedule prediction/playoff odds, the material in that textbook is all that is required.

 

So, are you forgetting your 11th grade math...or....

My point, as simply as I can state it is: that's not what far too many on this board were claiming in September. They in essence, in terms of predicting the season, were not only claiming to be direct decedents of Nostradamus, but to have also created the Philosopher's Stone, figured out Mona Lisa's smile, and to have solved all the Borgia Murders.

 

They "knew" this was a 4-12 team. No, this is at worst a 7-9 team. Wrong is wrong, but definitively screaming from the church spires that you know 4-12...that's idiocy.

 

I get probability... No problems with it, but you never responded to how the probability of a team missing the playoffs for 17 years straight... Off the top of your head.

 

Anytime someone says something like that you go back to patriarchy, conspiracy or some other bs...

 

You said you lurked my posts and you know'em... then let's discuss them Russel Crowe.

 

Again, you said my opinion of the Bills was intrinsically wife beating. You're nuts dude. Get a grip

Edited December 15, 2017 by Ol Dirty B

[OCinBuffalo]

15 minutes ago, Ol Dirty B said:

 

OK I thought that at first with the Bills beater comment but was lost. I'll say I was wrong... I have no problem admitting it. I could sit here and argue with it, but then I'd be bombarded with being labelled a conspiracy theorist, something about patriarchy, and then insulted about my bank account in regards to yours. They over achieved in my opinion.

 

You're seriously wacked dude, if you want to discuss my posts, let's discuss them. But if you want me to argue against what has happened, I'm simply not going to. The team is at least a 7 win team, so arguing they are a 4-6 win team is simply revisionist history.

Nah, just admitting you're wrong is fine. Anything else is surplus to requirements. 

 

Dude, I highly suggest you avoid bringing up history in any context in this discussion. You've already just proven you don't know the definition of revisionist history just now. I'd leave it at: you were wrong, and move on with your day. Also, I'd advise you to refrain from making any definitive statements in future. "We'll see" is the best way to go.

[Ol Dirty B]

4 minutes ago, OCinBuffalo said:

Nah, just admitting you're wrong is fine. Anything else is surplus to requirements. 

 

Dude, I highly suggest you avoid bringing up history in any context in this discussion. You've already just proven you don't know the definition of revisionist history just now. I'd leave it at: you were wrong, and move on with your day. Also, I'd advise you to refrain from making any definitive statements in future. "We'll see" is the best way to go.

 

No go on...

 

Let's see what you have to say.

 

You said my opinion of the Bills is the equivalent of domestic abuse. I want to hear what anyone has to say who is that far off the deep end.

 

You have nothing to say... This is why this gets drawn out, and bank accounts, and 11th grade math books get brought up. 

 

This team hasn't made the playoffs in 17 years, since you're a !@#$ing savant tell me what the probability of that is? You've gone on for 5 posts saying absolutely nothing. You know my posts, let's discuss. Enough with this stalling ****.

Edited December 15, 2017 by Ol Dirty B

[OCinBuffalo]

1 hour ago, Ol Dirty B said:

 

I get probability... No problems with it, but you never responded to how the probability of a team missing the playoffs for 17 years straight... Off the top of your head.

 

You just proved, in that single statement, that you don't get probability at all.

 

Given the NFL format, it's probable that some(mathematical use here) teams are going to have long playoff droughts, as it is probable that some teams are going to have long playoff runs. While, it's just as probable that some teams will stay "in the hunt" meaning 7-9, 8-8, 9-7 for long periods of time. In fact, "in the hunt" is more probable than anything else, because of a widely accepted statistical tenet: regression towards the mean. Go do some research and find out how often the Bills have deviated from the 7-9 wins mode over the 17 years. Not often. So, the Bills are actually doing the MOST probable thing of any team.

 

During the 17 years...the Seahawks made the playoffs with a 7-9 record. That's an anomaly, but it is true. Meanwhile, we've had an outlying but, no less dependent variable, in our division, the Patriots, who by definition have reduced our chances of making the playoffs, by making it themselves...for 16 of 17 years, with the miss year posting an 11-5 record.

 

The Bills have produced teams that would have made the playoffs if they were in other AFC divisions, and certainly in the NFC, for the last 17 years. This is a matter of fact, not opinion. In fact the Bills not making the playoffs is a statistical outlier, just like them getting never getting 0 wins, and/or being 4-12, that cannot be defined solely by the Bills themselves. Outside variables are obviously in play, which, is to be expected, again, given the NFL model. The Pats being good, our dominance over Miami...these are the are the unusual variables that keep us "in the hunt" == never good, and never bad.

 

Example: This year the Bills are IN the BEST AFC Division, East(.539 win %[all % rounded up]) 

playing the BEST NFC division, South(.577)

playing the 2nd BEST AFC division, West(.477)

It's highly improbable that the Bills have a winning record, but they do: fact.

 

Meanwhile, the Jaguars are IN the 2nd WORST AFC Division, South(.457),

playing the WORST AFC Division, North(.442)

playing 2nd WORST NFC Division(.500), West.

It's highly probable that they should be the #1 seed, but they aren't: fact.

 

These facts confront you: what will you do with them? Turtle? Call me crazy again?  Or will you realize that math...is math, and, even under pressure, regression towards the mean, in this case, dragging the Bills up from expectation, and Jags, down, is how math works? Do you understand that a 4-12 record is much less probable, than an 8-8 record, yet? Thus, do you understand that "knowing" the Bills are a 4-6 win team, before they've even played a single game...is silly, when we actually know that EVERY team is most likely to be a 7-9 win team when the season is done?

 

EDIT: Best of all, you could go do research and realize that in a 3 way tie...strength of schedule favors us for the rest of the season.

Edited December 15, 2017 by OCinBuffalo

[billsfan60]

4 hours ago, OCinBuffalo said:

You just proved, in that single statement, that you don't get probability at all.

 

Given the NFL format, it's probable that some(mathematical use here) teams are going to have long playoff droughts, as it is probable that some teams are going to have long playoff runs. While, it's just as probable that some teams will stay "in the hunt" meaning 7-9, 8-8, 9-7 for long periods of time. In fact, "in the hunt" is more probable than anything else, because of a widely accepted statistical tenet: regression towards the mean. Go do some research and find out how often the Bills have deviated from the 7-9 wins mode over the 17 years. Not often. So, the Bills are actually doing the MOST probable thing of any team.

 

During the 17 years...the Seahawks made the playoffs with a 7-9 record. That's an anomaly, but it is true. Meanwhile, we've had an outlying but, no less dependent variable, in our division, the Patriots, who by definition have reduced our chances of making the playoffs, by making it themselves...for 16 of 17 years, with the miss year posting an 11-5 record.

 

The Bills have produced teams that would have made the playoffs if they were in other AFC divisions, and certainly in the NFC, for the last 17 years. This is a matter of fact, not opinion. In fact the Bills not making the playoffs is a statistical outlier, just like them getting never getting 0 wins, and/or being 4-12, that cannot be defined solely by the Bills themselves. Outside variables are obviously in play, which, is to be expected, again, given the NFL model. The Pats being good, our dominance over Miami...these are the are the unusual variables that keep us "in the hunt" == never good, and never bad.

 

Example: This year the Bills are IN the BEST AFC Division, East(.539 win %[all % rounded up]) 

playing the BEST NFC division, South(.577)

playing the 2nd BEST AFC division, West(.477)

It's highly improbable that the Bills have a winning record, but they do: fact.

 

Meanwhile, the Jaguars are IN the 2nd WORST AFC Division, South(.457),

playing the WORST AFC Division, North(.442)

playing 2nd WORST NFC Division(.500), West.

It's highly probable that they should be the #1 seed, but they aren't: fact.

 

These facts confront you: what will you do with them? Turtle? Call me crazy again?  Or will you realize that math...is math, and, even under pressure, regression towards the mean, in this case, dragging the Bills up from expectation, and Jags, down, is how math works? Do you understand that a 4-12 record is much less probable, than an 8-8 record, yet? Thus, do you understand that "knowing" the Bills are a 4-6 win team, before they've even played a single game...is silly, when we actually know that EVERY team is most likely to be a 7-9 win team when the season is done?

 

EDIT: Best of all, you could go do research and realize that in a 3 way tie...strength of schedule favors us for the rest of the season.

And this, children, is why I tell you to just say "NO" to drugs.

Edited December 15, 2017 by billsfan60

[BringBackOrton]

4 hours ago, OCinBuffalo said:

You just proved, in that single statement, that you don't get probability at all.

 

Given the NFL format, it's probable that some(mathematical use here) teams are going to have long playoff droughts, as it is probable that some teams are going to have long playoff runs. While, it's just as probable that some teams will stay "in the hunt" meaning 7-9, 8-8, 9-7 for long periods of time. In fact, "in the hunt" is more probable than anything else, because of a widely accepted statistical tenet: regression towards the mean. Go do some research and find out how often the Bills have deviated from the 7-9 wins mode over the 17 years. Not often. So, the Bills are actually doing the MOST probable thing of any team.

 

During the 17 years...the Seahawks made the playoffs with a 7-9 record. That's an anomaly, but it is true. Meanwhile, we've had an outlying but, no less dependent variable, in our division, the Patriots, who by definition have reduced our chances of making the playoffs, by making it themselves...for 16 of 17 years, with the miss year posting an 11-5 record.

 

The Bills have produced teams that would have made the playoffs if they were in other AFC divisions, and certainly in the NFC, for the last 17 years. This is a matter of fact, not opinion. In fact the Bills not making the playoffs is a statistical outlier, just like them getting never getting 0 wins, and/or being 4-12, that cannot be defined solely by the Bills themselves. Outside variables are obviously in play, which, is to be expected, again, given the NFL model. The Pats being good, our dominance over Miami...these are the are the unusual variables that keep us "in the hunt" == never good, and never bad.

 

Example: This year the Bills are IN the BEST AFC Division, East(.539 win %[all % rounded up]) 

playing the BEST NFC division, South(.577)

playing the 2nd BEST AFC division, West(.477)

It's highly improbable that the Bills have a winning record, but they do: fact.

 

Meanwhile, the Jaguars are IN the 2nd WORST AFC Division, South(.457),

playing the WORST AFC Division, North(.442)

playing 2nd WORST NFC Division(.500), West.

It's highly probable that they should be the #1 seed, but they aren't: fact.

 

These facts confront you: what will you do with them? Turtle? Call me crazy again?  Or will you realize that math...is math, and, even under pressure, regression towards the mean, in this case, dragging the Bills up from expectation, and Jags, down, is how math works? Do you understand that a 4-12 record is much less probable, than an 8-8 record, yet? Thus, do you understand that "knowing" the Bills are a 4-6 win team, before they've even played a single game...is silly, when we actually know that EVERY team is most likely to be a 7-9 win team when the season is done?

 

EDIT: Best of all, you could go do research and realize that in a 3 way tie...strength of schedule favors us for the rest of the season.

The Jets and the Dolphins have made the postseason multiple times in the last 17 years.

 

"But but but don't they have to play the Pats too?!?!"

 

Enough.

[GunnerBill]

36 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

The Jets and the Dolphins have made the postseason multiple times in the last 17 years.

 

"But but but don't they have to play the Pats too?!?!"

 

Enough.

 

I think you are missing OC's point.  He is not arguing that it was impossible for the Bills to have made the playoffs.  He is arguing that when you look at the factors for why they haven't their own suckitude and poor decision making is only one factor.  The existence of the Patriots and the NFL division system are other variables that need to be accounted for.  No other division in the NFL has had a single team win double figure games for 14 consecutive seasons.  Therefore no other division has consistently has such a high bar for getting in.  The Dolphins and Jets have made it a couple of times each and it is to their credit because they have overcome those odds that make it more probable than not that they don't make it.  

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Analytics  do not win or lose games.   

 

Earlier in the week I posted what I heard on the local sports radio show. 

 

Washington has a higher DVOA than both Buffalo and Tampa yet have 2 or more losses than the 2.  

 

The 4 win guys were being negative Nancy’s and some of them at the time were high on Taylor.   

 

When hr bottom fell out the 4 winners bumped this thread to brag how right they were.   

Do we really need more LAMP posts?

Edited December 15, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan

[Samwell Tarly]

When you focus on the running game and defense and neglect quarterback, you end up with 6 to 8 wins pretty regularly.

[Sweats]

Hey guys, look at me!!!!!............i'm calling out everyone that ever said 4-12 cause its ridiculous.

 

However, there's nothing wrong with 5-11, 6-10, 7-9, 8-8 cause these are sooooooooooo much better.

[Real McClappy]

5 hours ago, Sweats said:

Hey guys, look at me!!!!!............i'm calling out everyone that ever said 4-12 cause its ridiculous.

 

However, there's nothing wrong with 5-11, 6-10, 7-9, 8-8 cause these are sooooooooooo much better.

IKR!

For a mathematical genius on outliers, you would think he would get why people would predict 4-12 to 8-8 season based off history and the roster coaching, FO, and player turnover?  This guy is calling out everyone as a clown when in fact he is the only clown in this thread. There is no math or science needed to prove this, just what is written.

 

 

Edited December 15, 2017 by Real McCoy

[BringBackOrton]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I think you are missing OC's point.  He is not arguing that it was impossible for the Bills to have made the playoffs.  He is arguing that when you look at the factors for why they haven't their own suckitude and poor decision making is only one factor.  The existence of the Patriots and the NFL division system are other variables that need to be accounted for.  No other division in the NFL has had a single team win double figure games for 14 consecutive seasons.  Therefore no other division has consistently has such a high bar for getting in.  The Dolphins and Jets have made it a couple of times each and it is to their credit because they have overcome those odds that make it more probable than not that they don't make it.  

The bar is high to out compete the Pats, not insurmountable. 

 

You know what bar is low? Make the playoffs once in 17 seasons. Gross incompetence is the key factor here. To try to explain it away, "The playoffs are hard! The Pats are too good! The AFC South!" is ridiculous.

 

There are 32 NFL teams, some of them have sucked hard for YEARS. But the Bills and the Bills alone hold the title of longest playoff drought almost ever.

 

The Browns play in one of the strongest divisions year in and year out. The Steelers and Ravens, along with the Bengals sprinkled in, are almost always playoff teams. Do they  have the longest active drought streak? No.

 

Stop. The. Excuses. The Bills #1 problem is and always has been, THE BILLS.

[GoBills808]

So I think it's pretty clear here that the Bills' inability to make the postseason is attributable solely to their fanbases' collective mathematical incompetency. We don't need a QB, we need remedial algebra.

[Virgil]

I like the money pit. That is my answer 

[rodneykm]

To a lot of people "being realistic" means being super negative. Sometimes that makes sense, but not in our case this year. We were a team on the verge of the playoffs last year. I can't not see how anyone would think we'd be less than a 7 to 9 win team. "4 and 10" is just someones way of getting attention. 

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

Playoffs or no playoffs McD has done a really good job in his 1st year as a HC with the players at his disposal. The talent and depth on the roster needs to be upgraded but McD is doing a good job in his 1st year. 

[Ol Dirty B]

20 hours ago, OCinBuffalo said:

You just proved, in that single statement, that you don't get probability at all.

 

Given the NFL format, it's probable that some(mathematical use here) teams are going to have long playoff droughts, as it is probable that some teams are going to have long playoff runs. While, it's just as probable that some teams will stay "in the hunt" meaning 7-9, 8-8, 9-7 for long periods of time. In fact, "in the hunt" is more probable than anything else, because of a widely accepted statistical tenet: regression towards the mean. Go do some research and find out how often the Bills have deviated from the 7-9 wins mode over the 17 years. Not often. So, the Bills are actually doing the MOST probable thing of any team.

 

During the 17 years...the Seahawks made the playoffs with a 7-9 record. That's an anomaly, but it is true. Meanwhile, we've had an outlying but, no less dependent variable, in our division, the Patriots, who by definition have reduced our chances of making the playoffs, by making it themselves...for 16 of 17 years, with the miss year posting an 11-5 record.

 

The Bills have produced teams that would have made the playoffs if they were in other AFC divisions, and certainly in the NFC, for the last 17 years. This is a matter of fact, not opinion. In fact the Bills not making the playoffs is a statistical outlier, just like them getting never getting 0 wins, and/or being 4-12, that cannot be defined solely by the Bills themselves. Outside variables are obviously in play, which, is to be expected, again, given the NFL model. The Pats being good, our dominance over Miami...these are the are the unusual variables that keep us "in the hunt" == never good, and never bad.

 

Example: This year the Bills are IN the BEST AFC Division, East(.539 win %[all % rounded up]) 

playing the BEST NFC division, South(.577)

playing the 2nd BEST AFC division, West(.477)

It's highly improbable that the Bills have a winning record, but they do: fact.

 

Meanwhile, the Jaguars are IN the 2nd WORST AFC Division, South(.457),

playing the WORST AFC Division, North(.442)

playing 2nd WORST NFC Division(.500), West.

It's highly probable that they should be the #1 seed, but they aren't: fact.

 

These facts confront you: what will you do with them? Turtle? Call me crazy again?  Or will you realize that math...is math, and, even under pressure, regression towards the mean, in this case, dragging the Bills up from expectation, and Jags, down, is how math works? Do you understand that a 4-12 record is much less probable, than an 8-8 record, yet? Thus, do you understand that "knowing" the Bills are a 4-6 win team, before they've even played a single game...is silly, when we actually know that EVERY team is most likely to be a 7-9 win team when the season is done?

 

EDIT: Best of all, you could go do research and realize that in a 3 way tie...strength of schedule favors us for the rest of the season.

 

I've said nothing that is counter to this. You talk about my posts, and you've responded to nothing I've ever said.

 

The team had some luck with turnovers, when that well dried up, the over achieving stopped. You should know, since you like to steep yourself into the numbers, that turnover differential, like fumbles, are the most inconsistent statistics, almost random. They change year to year a ton, I'm sure you read Barnwell since you love numbers so much. The Bills got to 5-2 riding a wave of turnovers that just was not going to continue. That's how they got to where they are now. 

 

I also like the fact that you're treating the longest post season drought in North American sports as though it statistically makes sense. Their are always outliers, you should know this. That's what the Bills are. 

 

9 hours ago, rodneykm said:

To a lot of people "being realistic" means being super negative. Sometimes that makes sense, but not in our case this year. We were a team on the verge of the playoffs last year. I can't not see how anyone would think we'd be less than a 7 to 9 win team. "4 and 10" is just someones way of getting attention. 

 

Yea, you'd get a lot of attention if you predicted "4 and 10"

Edited December 16, 2017 by Ol Dirty B

[BeginnersMind]

Was there a link in this thread where he posted his preseason prediction of how they'd do?