cancel out theory

[WhiteWonder 2,186]

I think I might go with you on that one.

 

When morons here advocate the COT be used every time you're playing an opponent with a WR on your QB's team.... it does become ridiculously easy to refute their position.

 

I'll go with that.

 

yeah i mean thats really what i have seen as far as examples from people against the COT... they say that if your opponent has say torry holt and you have marc bulger and drew brees why would you start marc bulger (just a random example i made)

 

but don't get me wrong in a situation where i have 2 equal QB's, if my opponent has the stud WR from one of their teams im going to use the COT. i think it is a neat little trick if anything

[AnaheimRams 28]

yeah i mean thats really what i have seen as far as examples from people against the COT... they say that if your opponent has say torry holt and you have marc bulger and drew brees why would you start marc bulger (just a random example i made)

 

but don't get me wrong in a situation where i have 2 equal QB's, if my opponent has the stud WR from one of their teams im going to use the COT. i think it is a neat little trick if anything

 

It's especially useful for people, like me, that don't draft stud QB's. When you're rolling with two or three guys you took in the middle rounds... matchups become key... and something to keep in mind in those matchups is who your opponent is starting.

 

Of course...

 

The Mensa members on this board will tell you that even looking at your opponents line-up is stupid since the point of the game is to just score the most points.

[cmh6476 761]

Does this change your opinions any?

 

 

This league gives huge bonuses to long TDs. Here is our scoring:

 

Passing/ Receiving TDs (both are scored the same)

 

0-29 yards = 5 pts

30-49 yards = 10 points

50+ = 15 points

 

So therefore, one TD of 54 yards from Cassel to Moss would equal what a 3 TD day for Rodgers equals. Not saying Rodgers can't hit a big one either, however his only true big play threat to me wou appear to be Moss. Starting Cassel, I'm not going to get killed by a single long bomb to Moss. Which is another factor influencing my decision, but I'm honestly still not sold either way at this point...

[South Beach 0]

Thank goodness for bno... someone needed to bring some clarity to this issue using irrefutable facts. It is so very clear now.

 

Appreciate the refresher course. That is exactly the thread I was thinking about!

 

 

 

 

 

:alsonotreallybutifindyourpostextremelyamusing:

[Barberian24 0]

Thank goodness for bno... someone needed to bring some clarity to this issue using irrefutable facts. It is so very clear now.

 

Appreciate the refresher course. That is exactly the thread I was thinking about!

:alsonotreallybutifindyourpostextremelyamusing:

 

 

I would think the only time the cancel out theory would work would be a big time TE or a WR AGAINST a QB. I benched Romo last week in my big league due in a large part to TO being a huge facet of his points. TO with 2 tds and 100 yds in standard scoring would be 22 pts. Romo's stats for those numbers are 13 pts. So the TO owner is plus 9 on Romo which would be a real setback to the highest scoring guy on your team. Lucky for me, I had the foresight to have Warner as my backup and Boldin as my WR2.

 

Im starting Bryant Johnson this week as my WR3 in hopes my opponent goes iwth JTO vs Detroit. If my 3rd WR can cancel out the top scorer on a team, its a tradeoff I can every day.

[kwyjibo 0]

The only thing the "Cancel Out Theory" actually cancels is your chance of winning.

[listen2me 23 1,551]

I laugh. Hard. At all the arguing over this and how many posts it got.

 

But maybe CMH was serious at the start?

[LunaTick 29]

here is the deal.

 

For the cancel to work, means that at all other positions you don't receive a goose egg.

And that you literally cancel out.

 

For if you have an injury, etc, your guy is ignored, etc. And you left someone who should have been the stud on the bench.

 

Who is the dud now?

 

Play your best play.

If in a tie, then heck. Why not. Is 50/50 anyways. May ad interest for your. Just don't go out of your way to do it.

[schmitty34 2]

Here, this thread explains it:

 

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.p...p;hl=cancel+out

 

That thread is good stuff. I love the guy that actually tries to explain the BS math and the concludes with, "It's a strategy you can only emply once or twice a year, really."

[Groundhog 24]

It's a retarded theory, for one simple reason. The value of it depends on whether you are beating the other guy, or losing to the other guy, excluding the players involved in this cancel-out game.

 

Let's say you've got Cotchery and the other guy's got Favre. They play on MNF this week vs. the Chargers. Let's say everyone else on both of your respective starting lineups have played. Now let's say you're trailing by a score of 95-85 going into that last game. You're pretty much assured that every time Cotchery scores points for you, the other guy's getting points from Favre. It makes it harder to catch up.

 

Now flip the respective scores, and the situation probably helps you. He's trying to catch up, but since Cotchery is Favre's #1 target, there's a pretty good chance that you'll both score points on a TD pass.

 

But since it's a total crapshoot whether you will be ahead or behind, excluding the COT game, there's no point in using it. Just pick the players you think will score you the most points. End. Of. Story.

[AnaheimRams 28]

It's a retarded theory, for one simple reason. The value of it depends on whether you are beating the other guy, or losing to the other guy, excluding the players involved in this cancel-out game.

 

Let's say you've got Cotchery and the other guy's got Favre. They play on MNF this week vs. the Chargers. Let's say everyone else on both of your respective starting lineups have played. Now let's say you're trailing by a score of 95-85 going into that last game. You're pretty much assured that every time Cotchery scores points for you, the other guy's getting points from Favre. It makes it harder to catch up.

 

Now flip the respective scores, and the situation probably helps you. He's trying to catch up, but since Cotchery is Favre's #1 target, there's a pretty good chance that you'll both score points on a TD pass.

 

But since it's a total crapshoot whether you will be ahead or behind, excluding the COT game, there's no point in using it. Just pick the players you think will score you the most points. End. Of. Story.

 

Let's say... for instance... that you have both Monday night QB's on your roster, team 1 and team 2... and your opponent was a WR from team 1.

 

You're winning by 20 points going into Monday night. Do you start the QB from team 1 or 2?

 

And if you're losing by 20? Same question.

 

Not so retarded now is it?

 

Regardless of which team or players are involed... you can virtually guarantee yourself a win by choosing correctly using only the COT.

 

How often does that happen? Who cares? Frequency doesn't trump math.

[Bgards79 0]

I am going to laugh at you when Cassell throws 3 picks and Moss scores on an End-Around.

[Thornton Melon 546]

Let's say... for instance... that you have both Monday night QB's on your roster, team 1 and team 2... and your opponent was a WR from team 1.

 

You're winning by 20 points going into Monday night. Do you start the QB from team 1 or 2?

 

And if you're losing by 20? Same question.

 

Not so retarded now is it?

 

Regardless of which team or players are involed... you can virtually guarantee yourself a win by choosing correctly using only the COT.

 

How often does that happen? Who cares? Frequency doesn't trump math.

 

What if one of the QBs sucks?

[MTSkiBum 1,598]

You guys are all racist

Your a homo, so that cancels out our racism

[t-birdie 8]

If you understand stock market "hedging," then the "cancel out" theory should make sense. It's a valid theory, but it's VERY limited in its actual application. The odds of having the opportunity to employ it are small.

 

I see stupid comments like "my opponent is starting Culter so if I start Royal over Owens I'll cancel out and win - that's dumb." You're right, that is dumb. It's a dumb comment. The cancel out doesn't work in a vacuum. Basically a stock market "hedge" is a bet you don't care if you win or not. For example, an airline might buy oil futures contracts with a strike price of $100/bbl - meaning they have the right to buy oil at a future date for $100/bbl no matter what the price is at that time. They pay a price for this right, obviously. They just locked in $100/bbl oil and paid a lesser price than if oil spiked to $150/bbl and ruined their profitability. With the futures contract, they don't care anymore what happens to the price of oil.

 

Let's say I have TRomo, MBarber, SJackson, LFitz, and AGates. My opponent is weak compared to me, but has CalJohnson at WR with a great matchup. There's a chance that TRomo and MBarber could get shut down or my other players have weak outings - and CalJohnson could potentially EXPLODE for 200+3TDs and I'd lose based on his one outstanding outing. On an average day, my team should win 9 times out of 10, but he has this one wildcard. I might start JKitna instead of TRomo even though, by itself, it's a weaker play. Essentially I don't care what Kitna does now because he's going to cancel out CalJohnson and my generally stronger team should out-average the rest of his team.

 

Note that the cancel out theory doesn't apply when you have a weaker team than your opponent. You want as many wildcards in the game as possible. If my team is significantly weaker and my opponent has JKitna and I have CalJohnson, I might start DHenderson over CalJohnson and hope Kitna has a bad outing and gets shut down. DHenderson is obviously a much weaker play, but he's a huge wildcard. He might catch two long TD passes and give me a chance to win over his better squad. If I start CalJohnson and he goes off, most likely I'm going to lose anyway because he's getting the same points for JKitna.

[WhiteWonder 2,186]

If you understand stock market "hedging," then the "cancel out" theory should make sense. It's a valid theory, but it's VERY limited in it's actual application. The odds of having the opportunity to employ it are small.

 

I see stupid comments like "my opponent is starting Culter so if I start Royal over Owens I'll cancel out and win - that's dumb." You're right, that is dumb. It's a dumb comment. The cancel out doesn't work in a vacuum. Basically a stock market "hedge" is a bet you don't care if you win or not. For example, an airline might buy oil futures contracts with a strike price of $100/bbl - meaning they have the right to buy oil at a future date for $100/bbl no matter what the price is at that time. They pay a price for this right, obviously. They just locked in $100/bbl oil and paid a lesser price than if oil spiked to $150/bbl and ruined their profitability. With the futures contract, they don't care anymore what happens to the price of oil.

 

Let's say I have TRomo, MBarber, SJackson, LFitz, and AGates. My opponent is weak compared to me, but has CalJohnson at WR with a great matchup. There's a chance that TRomo and MBarber could get shut down or my other players have weak outings - and CalJohnson could potentially EXPLODE for 200+3TDs and I'd lose based on his one outstanding outing. On an average day, my team should win 9 times out of 10, but he has this one wildcard. I might start JKitna instead of TRomo even though, by itself, it's a weaker play. Essentially I don't care what Kitna does now because he's going to cancel out CalJohnson and my generally stronger team should out-average the rest of his team.

 

Note that the cancel out theory doesn't apply when you have a weaker team than your opponent. You want as many wildcards in the game as possible. If my team is significantly weaker and my opponent has JKitna and I have CalJohnson, I might start DHenderson over CalJohnson and hope Kitna has a bad outing and gets shut down. DHenderson is obviously a much weaker play, but he's a huge wildcard. He might catch two long TD passes and give me a chance to win over his better squad. If I start CalJohnson and he goes off, most likely I'm going to lose anyway because he's getting the same points for JKitna.

 

 

i see where you are going, have pretty good knowledge of hedging but im not quite sure its a great analogy..

 

either way the simple answer is YES the cancel out theory can work but its NOT OFTEN that you get to employ it PRACTICALLY. Furthermore it only works when you are choosing between QUARTERBACKS

[t-birdie 8]

i guess I should have stated im starting him over rodgers, favre and schaub. I drafted 3 QBs, then added Cassel just cause

 

our linesups look like:

 

Cassel

Portis

Lynch

S Smith (Car)

Houshmandzadeh

Chambers (could go Gates)

Gostkowski

Buffalo

 

Palmer

Grant

Mcgahee (or k smith)

R Moss

S Moss

T Gonzalez

Graham

Minnesota

 

I dont like the matchups of any of my QBs, yet if he seems to have a player that could post big numbers, it would be Moss so i am definitely leaning going this way...

 

 

This is actually a perfect time to use the theory. Your team is far superior unless RMoss goes nuts and you didn't start Cassel. It's worth giving up the upside on your QB to cancel out Moss.

[South Beach 0]

Lots of good discussion on the cancel out theory. I enjoy reading all of the posts bothe serious and in jest.

 

Maybe its time to start a another thread on the "Last Licks" strategy as well.

[cmh6476 761]

Lots of good discussion on the cancel out theory. I enjoy reading all of the posts bothe serious and in jest.

 

Maybe its time to start a another thread on the "Last Licks" strategy as well.

are you trying to tell me I should start Rodgers or Favre over Cassel?

[Thornton Melon 546]

Let's say... for instance... that you have both Monday night QB's on your roster, team 1 and team 2... and your opponent was a WR from team 1.

 

You're winning by 20 points going into Monday night. Do you start the QB from team 1 or 2?

 

And if you're losing by 20? Same question.

 

Not so retarded now is it?

 

Regardless of which team or players are involved... you can virtually guarantee yourself a win by choosing correctly using only the COT.

 

How often does that happen? Who cares? Frequency doesn't trump math.

 

I can't let this statement go....

 

Let's see - it's 2007. I have Tom Brady and Jon Kitna as my QBs. My opponent has Randy Moss. The Pats and Lions are playing on Monday night, and I'm down by 20. I will virtually guarantee myself a win by starting Jon Kitna. Brilliant!!!

[Exit 160 0]

Allot of that depends on your leagues point system. I have T.O and my opponent has Romo.

 

1 pt per 25 passing yards

1 pt per 10 rec yards

1 pt per catch

 

Regardless of the overall game Romo has - anything that is throw to T.O will be in his advatage - he'll get more points on the actual play.

 

Do the Math!

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Bump; gotta get this brilliant thread back on the first page.

[WhiteWonder 2,186]

Let's say... for instance... that you have both Monday night QB's on your roster, team 1 and team 2... and your opponent was a WR from team 1.

 

You're winning by 20 points going into Monday night. Do you start the QB from team 1 or 2?

 

And if you're losing by 20? Same question.

 

Not so retarded now is it?

 

Regardless of which team or players are involed... you can virtually guarantee yourself a win by choosing correctly using only the COT.

 

How often does that happen? Who cares? Frequency doesn't trump math.

 

actually if you are winning by 20 then yes.. If you are losing by 20 not so fast.... if one QB/team is superior to the other even if your opponent has the WR from that team, you might still be best served starting that QB.... That QB has more weapons than just the WR your opponent is starting.

 

some people will say but when your QB scores points for you his WR will score for him. NOT nec. true.

[jaxjag 43]

Does this change your opinions any?

This league gives huge bonuses to long TDs. Here is our scoring:

 

Passing/ Receiving TDs (both are scored the same)

 

0-29 yards = 5 pts

30-49 yards = 10 points

50+ = 15 points

 

So therefore, one TD of 54 yards from Cassel to Moss would equal what a 3 TD day for Rodgers equals. Not saying Rodgers can't hit a big one either, however his only true big play threat to me wou appear to be Moss. Starting Cassel, I'm not going to get killed by a single long bomb to Moss. Which is another factor influencing my decision, but I'm honestly still not sold either way at this point...

 

What if Cassel goes down with an injury... or a RB hits Moss on a trick play? Or Cassel hits Moss but throws 3 picks?

 

and how often does the team you play have a single threat?

[jgcrawfish 232]

Let's say... for instance... that you have both Monday night QB's on your roster, team 1 and team 2... and your opponent was a WR from team 1.

 

You're winning by 20 points going into Monday night. Do you start the QB from team 1 or 2?

 

And if you're losing by 20? Same question.

 

Not so retarded now is it?

 

Regardless of which team or players are involved... you can virtually guarantee yourself a win by choosing correctly using only the COT.

 

How often does that happen? Who cares? Frequency doesn't trump math.

 

Again, this depends on they dynamics of your league scoring. If all TD's are 6 pts, then you'll likely win. If QB TD's are 4, and you're in a PPR...you're likely gonna lose regardless if your QB and WR hook up. Let's assume the following stat line QB: 300/3TD, WR: 120/3TD/12rec. Standard scoring would be (300/25)+(4x3) = 24 for QB. (150/10)+(6x3)+12=45 for the WR, meaning you lose by one. I'll agree in this case your likelihood of winning increases, but there is no guarantee. You could have the halfback pass to the WR, you could have a WR end around (reverse to all the monday night dumb@sses that don't know the difference). The bottom line is don't sit a QB who may well get you 300/3TD's for one that may get 200/1TD just to counteract the 100/1TD he plays.

[urmother 0]

i think i explain the concept pretty well in this old set of posts. my answers in red. also, as evidenced by the current posts it seems like people "get" cancelling out much better than they used to here.

 

Why, why, why...does this f'n topic continue to come up year after year?!?

 

What will it take to get it into some of your thick skulls that you cannot, in any way, shape, or form, cancel out your opponent's players? It doesn't happen. The theory simply doesn't exist.

 

Unbelievable that people still think this sh!t works and they'll defend it to the death. Did you sit in pumpkin patches on Halloween too?

to OP's credit he's not referring specifically to this. he's talking about choosing players w/slightly worse mean scoring averages but lower std deviations (more consistent scoring). in theory it's perfectly reasonable. but sample sizes in football are tiny so i think it's easy to overanalyze these situations (ie. is galloway really more likely to have a huge game than cj? this season he has been more boom/bust, but it's not a trend i'd project out)

 

and cancelling out players, while largely misunderstood by most folks, (and way overused) is a valid strat. again you're trying to decrease variance in a situation where you're favored or increase variance in a situation where you're not. the problem is that most folks like to cancel out just to do it w/out considering why. and practically they often choose too much of a performance hit for that decrease.

 

consider this example. say you're in a league that doesn't lock lineups and allows adjustments until that position has played (which is fairly common). you go into a monday night matchup btw the rams and lions w/ a 10 point lead and have a choice of playing either Kitna or Bulger. your opponents only player left is Roy Williams. Even though Bulger is outscoring Kitna by 3 points per game, you've got a no-brainer decision to start Kitna. It's just less likely that Williams will outscore his own QB by 10. to a lesser extent this concept also applies when your whole lineup is a significant fave (or the opposite when your whole lineup is a dog.)

 

 

 

Exactly what I am doing this weekend in one league . I have Delhomme and Romo, opponent has B.O ( oops T.O.) ...I am starting ROMO, as i need to offset a potential HUGE game from "81 !

 

both you and the poster you're referring to are thinking about this incorrectly. by starting a player whose stats are tied to one of your opponent's players, you're essentially exaggerrating the impact of the differential btw the rest of your lineups. that's great if you have an advantage at your other matchups overall. but it's horrible if you have a disadvantage at the other spots.

 

you should NOT cancel out just to do it. you only want to even consider "cancelling out" when you want to decrease variance (when you already have an edge). and you should do the exact opposite if you're at a disadvantage. also, you don't want to take this concept too far as projected points are significantly more important than whatever increase/decrease in variance you can usually hope to gain. but in tweener decisions, it can be a smart strategy to lean towards cancelling or the opposite, depending on how the rest of your lineup compares.

 

 

 

My apology for confusing the purpose of this topic.

 

But no, cancelling out players is NOT a valid strategy in ANY circumstance because it's not possible. Your WR points don't impact his WR points; his QB points won't impact your QB points. Just because the two are connected doesn't mean you're cancelling anything out. You're simply fielding your best team.

 

obviously you can't literally cancel an opponents stars points, but it's not invalid as a strategy. it's honestly conceptually hard to wrap the head around when looking at a whole lineup, but consider the below example.

 

--you have a 10 point lead going into monday nite and a choice of playing kitna/bulger w/your opponents only starter left being roy williams. do you just choose to start your best scorer at QB (bulger)? NO. you'd be much better-served to play kitna. roy has a better chance of outscoring bulger by 10 than he does of outscoring his own QB by 10. because their performances are related you're choosing to decrease variance (swings) btw that matchup (your QB, his WR). so you choose to start the QB that scores less on avg as a way of exaggerating the differential btw the rest of your lineups. it's easier to see that it's correct in this example because that difference is already known (you're up by 10). but it still applies to whole lineup decisions & projections.

 

 

 

I would consider something like this only for this particular situation, assuming I could change my roster after Sunday. No way would I play Kitna over Bulger when I initially set my lineup (assuming similar defensive matchups).

 

and you'd be correct to do so. practically, the decrease/increase in variance you can gain by practicing a "cancelling" strat (or the opposite) isn't worth much, and definitely not normally worth the dropoff btw bulger and kitna w/even matchups. but for real tweener decisions it is worth considering. and folks that deny it completely frankly just don't understand it.

 

the example i gave above is just an extreme example of a concept that still plays out over whole lineups set at the beginning of the week. concept applies regardless and is real (it's just not as significant in most situations as some people think, and is often misused.)

[WhiteWonder 2,186]

Again, this depends on they dynamics of your league scoring. If all TD's are 6 pts, then you'll likely win. If QB TD's are 4, and you're in a PPR...you're likely gonna lose regardless if your QB and WR hook up. Let's assume the following stat line QB: 300/3TD, WR: 120/3TD/12rec. Standard scoring would be (300/25)+(4x3) = 24 for QB. (150/10)+(6x3)+12=45 for the WR, meaning you lose by one. I'll agree in this case your likelihood of winning increases, but there is no guarantee. You could have the halfback pass to the WR, you could have a WR end around (reverse to all the monday night dumb@sses that don't know the difference). The bottom line is don't sit a QB who may well get you 300/3TD's for one that may get 200/1TD just to counteract the 100/1TD he plays.

 

i see what your getitng at but you can't assume all 3 TD's go to that WR.... even with 4pt passing TD's vs 6pt rec and a ppr, there are still 3 or 4 other weapons on the field for the QB to throw to. Ofcourse there is an amount of risk involved that the QB may lock on to 1 WR but if it is a true cancel out job where you are already winning the matchup otherwise or feel confident you have the stronger team otherwise, chances are your QB will produce close enough to their WR to make it work.

[SUXBNME 1,346]

Your a homo, so that cancels out our racism

Your a hippy liberal, so that cancels out canceling your racism

[flyjam 1]

i don't get why this is such a point of contention, it's a pretty easily understandable concept really. if your team is clearly better than your opponent's, anything that decreases the variance of the result is in your favor. this doesn't mean you use the strategy a lot, but if you're projected to score 100 points and he's projected to score 70 points and you have a really tough decision between a "cancel-out" player and a non-cancel out player to the point that you project each player's performance to be equal, playing the cancel-out player will increase your chances of winning by a couple percent. this is just statistical fact really.

[jaxjag 43]

I feel like I just watched a "Gilligan's Island" re-run for the 17th time.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

I feel like I just watched a "Gilligan's Island" re-run for the 17th time.

 

 

Should I start Ginger or Maryann?

[Thornton Melon 546]

Should I start Ginger or Maryann?

 

Both....sandwich!

[cmh6476 761]

i don't get why this is such a point of contention, it's a pretty easily understandable concept really. if your team is clearly better than your opponent's, anything that decreases the variance of the result is in your favor. this doesn't mean you use the strategy a lot, but if you're projected to score 100 points and he's projected to score 70 points and you have a really tough decision between a "cancel-out" player and a non-cancel out player to the point that you project each player's performance to be equal, playing the cancel-out player will increase your chances of winning by a couple percent. this is just statistical fact really.

I went with Cassel over Rodgers, really. It's pretty simple, really. His best player and seemingly only player that can really blow up, is Randy Moss. All QBs and WRs get the same points for TDs in this league, and there is no ppr. I feel my team is soundly better than his, and I am very comfortable truly cancelling out anything Moss does. The only exception is where Moss gets more than 50 yards, and Caseel does not. Because we do combined yardage, for WRs it 5 pts for 50 yards plus 1 for every 0 thereafter, and 5 pts for 250 combined for QBs, with a pt for every 10 thereafter. So this league scoring really is setup where the QB can cancel out anything a single WR can do.

 

We'll see how it works out, but with a guy like Moss that can single-handedly win a game for a team, I basially eliminate that possibility by starting Cassel today.

 

And you can't bank on any player getting hurt, that's just an ff rule and anyone can get hurt at anytime. Dumb to even argue that. And how many times has Moss ever scored on an end around or a pass from Maroney or Faulk?

[flyjam 1]

there's no way in hell i use the cancel out strategy in your situation... rodgers is a much better start this week in my opinion.

[cmh6476 761]

there's no way in hell i use the cancel out strategy in your situation... rodgers is a much better start this week in my opinion.

yeah, now I need 6 points from chambers tonight

[cmh6476 761]

i lost by 1 point, rodgers or favre would have won it for me

 

fock the fockin cancel out theory

[South Beach 0]

Sorry cmh.. tough break. Next time try the "Last Licks" strategy. BNO makes a strong argument (TO - 0 points "notice the cancel...") but sometimes it does not work out. I always plug in the guys with the latest start time - usually for Sunday and Monday night. Here are a couple of reasons I like to employ this strategy:

 

 

- Bigtime players love the spotlight and want to have huge performances on the national stage. This does not mean players do not care about games on Sundays, but Monday night sometimes has a little different feel to it. Is this statistically valid? Probably not, but I'm no uber-genius like the guys who do all of the cancel out math so I can't be sure.

 

- Last Licks is a good way to extend your interest in the football weekend. Last night I would have normally been tempted to do so pre-emptive Tuesday work email when the Chargers went up by 21 & 24. Due to the LL strategy, I started Cotchery and was living and dying with each NYJ possession at the end of the game. Screw work on monday nights... this is America and Americans love football. I will not standby and let any of you bad mouth America!

 

- If nothing else, my opponent had to sweat out a close game just a little bit longer. He is on the east coast so he probably had to stay up pretty late to see if he won. He did win so screw him if he's tired today at work. Petty? Yes - but it makes me feel a little better for having lost.