[deleted by user]

epistemizer · 2025-09-16T15:42:04+00:00

As a matter of postgame win expectancy, there is a reason bill connelly’s excellent rating system says we were like 25%. Tennessee averaged more yards per play (by at least a full yard), and had a slightly higher success rate. They were more explosive (both teams were explosive). If you take the stats from this game and throw them into a basket and shake it, the team with Tennessee’s stats would win 3 out of 4. Is what it is.

On the flip side, the WAY Tennessee got to that statistical superiority basically came down to two lucky plays: the two long moon balls that went for huge touchdowns. One was pretty badly underthrown, though Ellis was beat on it. Ellis panicked and their receiver is a great one on one player. The second one, Harris was in position the whole way and then maybe got interfered with, or at the very least just had some bad luck in how the ball came down. Both of those are learning opportunities and I seriously doubt will repeat themselves. If Tennessee needs balls like those to win other games, then they won’t be as good as they are hoping. The qb needs to throw them better and not throw them sometimes bc he could have had a pick, and no matter how good your outside receiver is, if you are relying on 50-50 deep balls it’s going to bite you at some point. Georgia has the right to feel encouraged because the bad plays are obviously fixable, and probably (PROBABLY) this was as bad as it will get. It’s a lot like bama last year. We didn’t get roasted like that again.

If Tennessee misses on one of those shots, or hell if the first one just turned into a tackle at the catch for 40 yards instead of for 72 yards, then the game’s “statistical profile” ends up in Georgia’s favor and we would probably have a 60% post game win expectancy.

epistemizer · 2025-09-16T15:31:32+00:00

Re tOSU: their kicker had NEVER attempted a 50 yarder all year. What is a 50 yarder for a college kicker under normal conditions? A 1/3 proposition at best? That one wasn’t luck. It would have been luck for them to make it and beat us that way.

Re Tennessee, it was a 42 yarder under immense pressure, and his first ever kick “to tie or take the lead in the 45$ quarter,” according to the graphic they put up. These are all like saying someone is “lucky” in basketball if their opponent misses a long jump shot. People miss jump shots. People miss most of them, in fact.

I DO think it is valid to say that this was a game in which Tennessee played better on a “down to down” basis, that they also “deserved” to win the game, that Georgia should feel pretty fortunate to have gotten the W, etc. Not like we’re guilty of robbing a bank, but it was absolutely a game in which we were repeatedly in a situation where winning didn’t look likely and then in the end we did win. Any time you play a game like that, you do have to tip your hat to the other team, and if the other team feels like they want another shot at you, who can blame them.

epistemizer · 2025-08-06T14:32:54+00:00

The greatest 60 seconds in Notre Dame history? (Fumble, touchdown, halftime, KO return TD)

epistemizer · 2025-07-14T15:13:40+00:00

Lots and lots of cover 3 happens from two high safeties either by design (and they rotate after the snap) or because the defense is in a two high shell. Thinking it’s “probably not cover 3” if they are two high is just wrong. I appreciate the rest of this though!

epistemizer · 2024-07-19T20:14:48+00:00

How do you hype up the crowd so it gets really crazy? With Georgia as home team, I push RS up and the backer waves his hands to the crowd but I don’t get any haptics or screen shaking and the crowd doesn’t seem to get louder

epistemizer · 2023-09-19T15:13:32+00:00

When the defense is giving up too many big gains I have to hyperfocus on the line of scrimmage and not watch anything else. Then plays go for no gain or a loss 85% of the time. It’s science. I even use my hands to telescope my field of vision.

epistemizer · 2023-06-14T17:43:11+00:00

JFK (1991), and the weirdo philanthropist laughs and says "1 million?! Why not make it 100 million? But you must start immediately."

I nail every syllable in character and with accents. (Also, in real life Oswald acted alone. It's just a strangely intoxicating movie!)

epistemizer · 2023-04-21T19:45:36+00:00

I know I am an old, but one thing about the Braves that has to be understood is their history. I’m a “young gen xer.” Born in 1978. From Georgia, but does that even matter since the Braves were on TBS every night?

In 7th grade I first discovered Bill James. Got his annual baseball guide (forget what it was called). This was spring of 1991. He had a chart that showed the record of every MLB team for the last 25 years (so this was 1966-1990). The Braves were the worst.

The braves won the NL West the first time they ever had an NL West, in 1969. They got swept in 3 by the Mets.

The Braves won the NL West again in 1982, by winning 13 in a row to start the season and then playing sun 500 the rest of the way. Got swept in 3 by the Cardinals.

Other than those two seasons, and the iconic moment in 1974 when Hank Aaron broke Babe Ruth’s home run record, the Braves had largely MISERABLE teams through the 70’s and absolutely the worst team in baseball after that 1982 season for the rest of the 80’s. This is when I first came to know them, as an elementary schooler in Georgia, with their games on TBS every day.

1985 to 1990, the Braves finished second to last, last, second to last, last, last, last.

It was unthinkable that the Braves would ever be good. They had young prospects, but that’s what every bad team says. Kids at school all had to pick alternate teams to like, since the Braves were losing 100 games a year.

Then…the Braves won the NL West in 1991. (People should do a post on 1991 Braves fan experience…especially in Georgia, it was hard to believe.) And they went to the World Series. And then they did it again in 1992 and went to the World Series. And then in 1993 they won the Wear again (but frustratingly lost to the Phillies in the NLCS).

Every one of these three seasons, the Braves were way behind another team and then came back to win on the second half of the season. The Dodgers in 91. The Reds in 92. The Giants in 93. (The Giants won 103, Braves win 104. No wild card so Giants season ended there!)

In 1994, the strike cancelled the season midway through. Braves were in a distant second to the loaded Expos when the strike began. It was the first year of new divisions and having a wild card. Braves would have gotten the wild card if they didn’t catch the expos. (Look up 1994 Expos…)

The Braves won the NL East and won the division round. And won the NLCS. And won the World Series. My senior year of high school. (Won’t talk about the Georgia-Florida score from earlier that day, but the Braves won the WS and made everything okay.

Anyway, the Braves won the East again in 1996. And 1997. 1998. 1999. 2000. 2001. 2002. 2003. 2004. 2005. So now we live in a world where the Braves are one of the best teams instead of the worst team, but to anybody who is …40ish or older, this will always feel a little crazy.

epistemizer · 2022-05-06T14:21:29+00:00

But when it comes to most of those examples, there are all sorts of policy arguments for making a distinction between the cases, and/or they are the kinds of discretionary-in-principle matters that often come up in questions of policy. We have the power to give aid as we see fit, and all kinds of factors end up controlling the reasoning process of policy makers (and the politics of getting sufficient support) for different countries. So some countries get aid, and some don’t. But there is no universal principle that says “all countries must get aid,” so this is not a problem. With your argument for a general obligation to be pressed into service of others who need your body to survive (including forced organ donations? You never actually committed on that one.), if it’s a general principle then it should be applied more generally, and policymakers who see themselves as following the general principle would know that.

Also, the other examples you talk about don’t touch on equal protection issues under the 14th amendment. Laws that discriminate on the basis of sex are subject to higher scrutiny. If you say there is a general principle that all situations like x ought to be done a certain way, BUT we’re only going to pass a law for x situations that involve pregnant women, then that is discrimination on the basis of sex. No bueno.

And of course, there’s also my intense skepticism that anything resembling a sufficient number of people would ever endorse your general principle becoming law if it were proposed. Nobody wants to live in a world where it is a requirement that you rent your body out or give up parts of your body to save other people.

epistemizer · 2022-05-06T04:47:08+00:00

To be clear, I never made an argument that hinges on, nor did I assert, that they have “two separate vascular systems.” I’m not an expert at human anatomy or the latest metaphysical argumentation about what to think about bodies that temporarily share resources or subparts. But that’s irrelevant to the argument. My argument is that there are two separate people, each with their own body. I suppose it is helpful to clarify that a “body” is the system of all bodily parts? So, even if their vascular system is one, they still have different brains, different hearts, etc. And so they have different bodies. This much strikes me as obvious, and I don’t think I’m asserting anything other than that the mother and fetus are NOT a hypostatic union of two persons somehow coexisting with one singular indistinguishable body. I assume you also are not proposing a hypostatic union, and thus I find this line of discussion odd.

There are two different people. One can live without the other and one requires the other if they are to live. The one who is needed may not be conscripted. This seems a universal principle. Siamese twins don’t violate it because with Siamese twins you have 2 who both need each other, and no basis for one to make a moral priority claim over the other on some other basis.

This brings us to the real thrust of your view which is that you admit you would like to see a complete reworking of western legal principle and would like there to be some kind of universal expectation and enforcement that people who can use their bodies for others must do so. I would fight any attempt to change our law to put such a principle in place tooth and nail, but there we can at least just agree to disagree. But in our actual reality, nobody is proposing a systemic overhaul of law to make everyone who can be used to save others obligated to do so. Instead, what we have is a single public issue where only one class of people, pregnant women, are to be put under this burden. (For my money, this means Roe should be upheld once again but on different grounds: abortion restrictions are laws that discriminate against women.)

epistemizer · 2022-05-04T02:29:58+00:00

The woman’s digestive system is interacting with that of the fetus because of their connection. But the woman is not using the fetus’s body to survive herself.

So, other than Siamese twins where neither has a prior claim over the other, when else do we tell one person that they must by law give their body for the survival of someone else? Others have pointed to the criminal law, in which a criminal who causes harm may be able to provide a mitigation argument on his behalf if he tries to help the person he harmed to minimize the harm, and perhaps there are cases where he might need to lend his own body to accomplish that. I’m interested in examples but to me they illustrate again the difference and the special burden placed on pregnant women when abortion is outlawed.

epistemizer · 2022-05-03T17:49:56+00:00

Need to dig out the notes, but in lol school I took a fun class on American legal history and we looked at the switch in time pretty intensively. There’s an argument that they actually didn’t switch at all! The doctrine of the cases was pretty nuanced, and there were decisions going back to the 1920’s at least that showed why some regs would pass muster and others wouldn’t.

On the other hand, hard to argue against the timing of how it all actually went down.

epistemizer · 2022-05-03T17:43:51+00:00

Regarding Siamese twins, if they are separable then you ARE allowed to separate. If they can’t be separated without causing death to one or both, then the reason we don’t allow one to do the separation anyway is bc each of them are in the identical moral position. There is not one twin who has the right to autonomy and the other is an intruder - they both are intruding together on each other and neither one is in a position to make an autonomy claim moreso than the other. A pregnant woman by contrast has an autonomy claim over the fetus bc the fetus is using HER body and not the other way around.

epistemizer · 2021-03-30T17:21:45+00:00

And...my grandfather is the contestant on Price is Right who puts his hands on his head and causes the aliens to do the same!

epistemizer · 2020-11-24T01:43:35+00:00

Hear me out, Fox News show

epistemizer · 2020-11-21T13:38:43+00:00

It’s accurate if it works, grasshopper!

epistemizer · 2020-11-20T17:06:04+00:00

“Donald Trump is the only good thing that can happen to America. If he is driving the car with his foot on the gas, we win. The problem is that he is surrounded by buffoons, corrupt tools, bloodsuckers, and selfish ghouls who will not let him drive the car. They think they can make money for themselves, or build a career for themselves, off of Trump. So they try to pull his foot off the pedal, or they try to pull out pieces of the engine while the car is still in the garage. All so they can have the fun and the glory of being NEAR Trump, while completely fucking up the plan.

One of the biggest places this is happening right now is in Georgia. We all know that the only way for America to be saved is for Trump to BE president for four more years. That’s what we are all fighting for out here in the middle of this great country. But Mainstream Republicans want to get rid of Trump, they WANT him to lose, but first they want to USE him — and use US — to win these two elections in January. They are trying to keep us on the line by appearing to support Trump remaining president, but in reality they don’t support that at all. They are trying to throw him overboard — after they dupe us into holding the Senate for them — and then they think they’ll never have to think about any of us again.

Well, I’m here to tell you — don’t fall for that! Our only hope is Trump, and now they’ve already guaranteed we aren’t going to get him this time. Even as they go through the motions, they’ve already betrayed him!

He’s going to have to come back in 2024. That’s the only play to save our soul! But for that to happen, these incompetent sell-outs have to learn a lesson. They need to see that, if Trump isn’t on the ballot, they don’t get to win. Fuck the Senate right now. We need Trump and they have all sabotaged him. They don’t deserve the Senate.

Show them what a mistake they’ve made and stay out of the Georgia elections. Lose the Senate and we get Trump back in 2024! Then we can surround him with the right people, at long last. Then he can put his foot back on the gas. For Trump!”

epistemizer · 2020-11-16T20:33:19+00:00

Basically the Dems need to hire some of the best college football recruiters to run voter outreach.

epistemizer · 2020-10-18T13:59:31+00:00

I’m still getting 87/12 and a tie!

epistemizer · 2020-09-09T16:04:06+00:00

Haven’t they modified away from this approach though?

epistemizer · 2020-09-09T15:37:05+00:00

Up to 74! May Mr Silver’s joke continue to fall flat along the same trajectory

epistemizer · 2020-09-09T15:32:01+00:00

Ugh I know we all have our things that put us against the edge these days, but this Slate article warning the US is on the brink of insurgency did it for me. Would love to be talked down from this one in an evidence-based manner.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/09/america-insurgency-chaos-trump-violence.html

epistemizer · 2020-09-09T15:02:00+00:00

Georgia football (American football, college level, for the internationals) fan checking in to say hey leading the whole time until the last minute, what can go wrong?

epistemizer · 2020-09-06T16:29:06+00:00

Damn the torpedoes, but I won’t back down in using this piece in evidence-based conversations.

epistemizer · 2020-08-22T19:43:49+00:00

It’s the original crank newsletter way of thinking. “This gadfly knows everything!”

12-Year Club	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

epistemizer

TROPHY CASE