NFL Prediction League

[Sqrl]

CrimsonRevolver said:

Sqrl said:

Sentences are too long to quote?

Of course I know what I said, but the point is you can't have that sentence above your post because it highlights how flimsy your comment really is.

I'll go over it just so its clear to you:

• I say the careers aren't what matters to this game, that it's what they've done this season.
• I say Brees is not an elite QB because that status is built over a career.
• You point to my comment of Brees not being an elite QB of proving your point that Manning as an edge due to his career.

This is a pretty obvious failure of logic.  The argument you should be making, if you care to discuss the issue at all, is why the career matters more in a single game than their recent performances.

PS - Considering that I'm the OP of the thread and that I'm running this league...I say when its /thread.

edit: PPS - Oh and were you going to give any of those specific forecasts of how Manning would display his advantage in the game?

No, but livid retorts are.

Yeah, I quoted you to illustrate how "flimsy" my comment was. That must be it.

• The season doesn't matter. It's the Super Bowl. It's different. Case in point, the Giants-Patriots game a few years back.
• ...And Peyton is an elite quarterback. lol /argument
• If Peyton is an elite QB, and Drew Brees isn't, how does that not indicate the advantage he has over Brees for you? Are they just magically equal all of the sudden? /smh

Now you're just getting mad. When you read this, before you respond, maybe you should take a nap first. I'm worried your anger could affect your decision-making.

/thread

Livid retorts?  I think you are being just a tad self-important to think I care enough about this discussion to be livid. Certainly I would admit to being slightly annoyed at how you keep trying to make the discussion about anything but football...as you're doing now by trying to push the conversation towards some imagined anger. Let me give you some friendly advice on this and just tell you, as a friend, that this "r u mad?" stuff is the stuff of trolls and you...well lets just so you're not that person, right?

Now on the actual topic of football, your reply really has nothing new. You repeated the same argument about Manning pretty much verbatim with no attempt to change it and no reasoning as to why I might be wrong beyond that you simply declared that I am wrong. Which is no argument at all obviously.

I won't repeat my rebuttal to it, you can reply to my last post again if you'd like, only this time please make some sort of attempt at a subtantive rebuttal and/or provide some specific predictions.  And if you don't have any substantive points you want to raise then don't respond at all.

Now the prediction I will address because I'm not sure you understand what I'm saying entirely:

As it stands I really cant give you any credit for your current prediction as it is so nebulous that you could claim victory 50% of the time (When IND wins)...no matter how Manning were to gain advantage in the game you will simply claim you were right. This is sort of like your "NO will rape MIN" prediction where an overtime field goal apparently qualified in your view...in short you were going to claim a successful prediction regardless of the outcome so long as NO won. The bottom line is if you know as much as your projected confidence indicates about Manning and how this game will play out you can easily name at least one aspect that we can look at after the game to judge the prediction objectively.

The issue is that even if the Colts win and Manning has the best day of his life and Brees has the worst day of his life your prediction still won't be shown correct.  This is a pretty basic concept of game theory actually whereby a player in a game can make a terrible decision and have the result turn out to be a positive one and yet their choice is still considered a bad one (you can find this concept all throughout the field of game-theory).  A good example is poker where a player holding no made hand could call his entire stack of chips against a player who has just re-raised him for the 2nd time this hand.  The re-raises indicate strength by the opponent and by calling he has no chance of bluffing him out of the hand and commits all of his money with literally nothing...but if the final card dealt gives him the straight flush and the pot his choice to call the bet is still not correct - it is lucky.  The call is only correct if you can defend it with sound reasoning as to why it is the correct choice to make out of the options available.

Similarly just saying you think Manning has an edge won't be proven by a Colts win.  Which is why some sort of specific thing we can look for during the game that Manning will do that Brees can't do is needed to seperate a correct prediction from simply getting lucky.  It will show that you're not just throwing trash out there and claiming victory for any scenario that even remotely fits.  If you're not up to that then no problem, I won't hold it against you, but then also don't expect adulation either.

Considering your avoidance of the issue thus far I'll take the absense of any such specifics to be your answer.

PS - Enjoy the game =)