SenorGato Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Yeah JiF, find some place BETTER than Wikipedia that says you aren't allowed to add games that don't exist to do the math. The Jets finished the 20 game NFL season last year at 6-10 with 4 no plays - 4 below .500! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Jif-Show me anywhere where the formula is stated differently. Go ahead. Sorry to blow your mind No, you're right and don't apologize. This is why I like to surround myself with smart people so dumb asses like me can learn from them and stuff. The Jets who were 6-10, were 4 games under .500. However, hypothetically, if they won 2 more games, they'd have been .500. It doesnt make any sense...but I dont argue with math. Its the universal language Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangreenman Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Yeah JiF, find some place BETTER than Wikipedia that says you aren't allowed to add games that don't exist to do the math. The Jets finished the 20 game NFL season last year at 6-10 with 4 no plays - 4 below .500! Yeah, thats confusing. If you were to think of it like in baseball, a team that is 6-10 is in fact only considered 2 games behind a team that is 10-10, as well as 2 games behind a team that is 8-8. Either way, I think its fair to say the jets finished 2 games behind .500 last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stugotz81 Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Scott - you are right in the theory of Math, in the theory of an NFL season you are wrong.....like it or not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Either way, I think its fair to say the jets finished 2 games behind .500 last season. If it makes you feel better to state it that way, have at it. But the mathematical part is incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Scott - you are right in the theory of Math, in the theory of an NFL season you are wrong.....like it or not Every sport states it the same way 6-10 is 4 games under .500. Like it or not. I didn't make the rule, just following it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 This kinds of reminds me how, as a member of project mayhem, you have no name. But in death, a member of project mayhem has a name, his name is Robert Paulsen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 His name is Robert Paulsen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stugotz81 Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Every sport states it the same way 6-10 is 4 games under .500. Like it or not. I didn't make the rule, just following it. But logically speaking Scott!!! How can they be 4 games under .500??? Tell me how we are getting 4 more games after a team has completed 16 games(6-10) to say they were 4 games away from being .500? Where are you getting this info from? To be correct, it has to be said they were 2 wins short of being .500....to say 4 games means they would be 10-10!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 But logically speaking Scott!!! How can they be 4 games under .500??? Tell me how we are getting 4 more games after a team has completed 16 games(6-10) to say they were 4 games away from being .500? Where are you getting this info from? To be correct, it has to be said they were 2 wins short of being .500....to say 4 games means they would be 10-10!!! They are 4 games under .500, because, according to their current record (6-10 in this case), they would need to win 4 more games to achieve that .500 mark. It has nothing to do with how many games are in the season, or where you are in the season relational to its end. It has nothing to do with hypothetical wins of games you lost. It has everything to do with how many games would you need to win, in order to be .500 (break even). just the way it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenseed4 Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 His name is Robert Paulsen. We don't talk about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.