Go for it brah.

Reading comprehension fail. Nobody said they were 70% to win before the game started. What people are saying is that the way the teams played the Cardinals will win that game more often than the Steelers will to the tune of 70% or so (that was a Cl.a.rk guesstimate). This doesn't mean they were the "better" team or that they would be the favorite in a rematch, it means that they were better on the whole for those 60 minutes.

Your team won, that's what matters. I don't see the point in getting defensive about it.

Yeah and Clark just threw that number out arbitrarily. The score was 20-7 going into the 4th quarter and I don't remember at what point the Cards scored their 1st TD but the Steelers led for at least 75% of that game. The statistics also were pretty similar. Saying that if they were to play at the exact same level as they played that game the Cardinals would win 70% of the time is baseless and saying the Steelers only get "0.3" of a RANG for that game is just stupid.

WP there Riverman.

this whole argument is a logic fail though

I'm 50% to get heads flipping a coin - it comes up heads on one flip - so now heads probability was really 100% - or anything different than 50%?

There's a logic fail here, but it's not from tuq.

Heads can't outplay tails, brah

that's the point?

your point is invalid

like i said, confirmed

The Cardinals did outplay the Steelers. No one was arguing what would have happened if you simulated the game 1000 times, no one cares. The Cardinals did outplay the Steelers in that game, though, and trying to create a heads/tails analogy to that situation is ******ed because it doesn't work at all.

To the tune of 7:3?

Probably not, it's dumb to get pissed about a number Clark just threw out randomly though.

Right, I don't know why this is such a hard concept to grasp.

if you are trying to figure out what a team % chance of winning a game was, just because they lost the game doesn't change that %.

You're arguing something different, but it's still not entirely true if you're referring to percentages based on Vegas lines. We've talked about this recently in the NBA thread, pre-game percentages are based on information available at the time. 2004 NBA Finals and the Patriots/Giants Super Bowl are two great examples of percentages that would change dramatically based on the information we have now.

Before the Steelers/Cardinals SB, many thought the Cards were just running extremely hot and were going to be completely outmatched. I wouldn't be surprised if there true win percentage was much higher than was reflected in Vegas before the game.

The coin flip analogy doesn't hold because new information doesn't change the 50/50 percentage. It's not so simple in sports.

are you saying whenever an underdog wins a game, their winning % before the game was too low?

no ffs but it does happen

Yeah, I guess. Whatever. I am done itt now.

LOLSteelers

Hey, remember when Big Rape sexually assaulted two women and then lost the Super Bowl?

Heh... that was awesome.

in b4 another agdci post ITT

lol steelers

still lol steelers though

lol steelers

Obvious Photoshop is obvious.

Also, LOL Browns

8 days since