Yeah I definitely heard him say Pats would be 3 point dogs in Denver.

I'm sure he'd come up with some nonsensical explanation for the change.

30:40

http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/hbos...n-sal-42023641

He says the Pats would probably be a 3 pt underdog in Denver.


LOL, good catch Yeti.

http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-...?autoplay=true

43:10 mark is when they guess the Pats-Broncos game. (Sal's reasoning is kind of stupid but at least he doesn't look at the lines before guessing.)



My favorite part of the podcast was when Sal suggested that they all watch the game together. (Sal, Bill, Bill's Dad, Adam Corolla, etc.)

48:05

Bill makes an excuse about Corolla being bad luck. He must realize how awkward it would be with his Dad being there. Bill's Dad would only let his Brother talk during commercial breaks of the Pats game. That is incredibly strange.

To play devil's advocate for a second, the Pats comfortably covered and looked very solid against KC, while the Broncos backdoor covered and should have lost to a Steelers team without their top two RBs, top WR (and the best in the league), and an injured Big Ben. Manning looked terrible. That the line would move based on those results isn't surprising.

That is a good point.

Yea this is the definition of douche. I'm kinda at a loss for words actually. Total bitch move.

Manning looked like virtually everyone expected him to look, if anything slightly better (poor running performance is more of a factor imo). Pats were hardly overwhelming. Obviously this would be his reasoning if pressed, but you'd think he'd explain it at the time.

If Broncos crushed the Steelers, they're still not a 3 point favorite.

agree with all of legend's post. pats with the weapons back were as expected, and manning looked at least as good as anticipated. anyway, even if that is bill's narrative, that's not a six point swing.

a much better explanation would simply be 'i thought about it more instead of instantly tossing out a line'.

thanks for digging up the timestamps jwd. i don't think it's a huge deal but it would be fun to see sal call him out on it next week. sadly i doubt there is a way to get this info to sal, only billy reads this thread.

Klosterman's Next Book Is About How We're Wrong

http://www.vulture.com/2016/01/klost...ere-wrong.html

Klosterman was likely sent from the future to troll us so that book makes sense

Thanks for the link, Yeti. Klosterman book looks interesting.

Also, the jump from -3 to +3 isn't quantified by 6 points as it looks on surface. It's not really that far off.

the advance line on 5D was like NE -2.5 IIRC

Man I want to powerbomb chuck so bad.

ok, it's the difference between winning 40% of the time and 60% of the time. pretty sizeable imo.

There's a nonzero chance ARC is Klosterman.

many years ago, while in SF travelling alone i did the fisherman's wharf to tiburon bike ride. i was unfit and it was a deceptively hot day. i arrived at my destination a sweaty sunburnt mess and settled down at a waterside cafe to have a couple of beers and read some of my chuck klosterman book.

a cute waitress who was serving me commented on the book and said that she liked chuck, and we struck up a bit of conversation. let me clarify that at this point in life i'm super shy and none of what i'm saying is at all smooth.

the second time she came back to my table i thought it would be a good idea to recite to her a paragraph of the book i had just laughed at. unfortunately, as soon as i started reading this passage aloud i realised that it was not only quite a bit longer than i had anticipated, but also not all that funny when read by a mumbling englishman.

unfortunately there is no great punchline to this story, but i just remembered that and it made me laugh. i might try to dig up the bit, it was about someone's outfit looking like something bowie would wear in the 70s, and was probably in sex, drugs and cocoa puffs.

It took me a while to realize that was a story about you and not an excerpt from one of his books.

I thought Yeti was telling us about how he met his wife for a while there. Story did not deliver.

Just now listened to the BS/Gladwell episode. BS talking about Bowie grilling MTV about not playing black artists in the early 80s, "was there really that much racism then? I don't know, I was in new england so I was kinda sheltered from that"

holy **** head explode.

Bill is the Malcolm Gladwell of sports

Maybe he meant that he never saw black people ever? But I get your point.

I grew up in the 80s in a very racist place but I never saw any black people so I didn't know it.

It's almost impossible Bill isn't aware of Boston's reputation as a classically racist sports city, especially during the 80s. I guess maybe he's just talking about MTV, but that doesn't make it less dumb. Especially for somebody who fashions himself a pop culture expert.

An old thread of David Sklansky's is linked in a 538 article.

NFL Coaches Are Getting Away With Crimes Against Middle School Math

It's in the section titled "Kansas City fails to butter its toast".

What's dumb is not understanding what Bill was saying. He was admitting a blind spot of his youth, not questioning how much racism existed in 1982.

New Englanders were sheltered from MTV?

Yeah, that makes much more sense.

This. Northern kids don't always see the systemic racism around them. Many realize it as they grow older, sadly many don't.