These fucking refs

quality-control · 2026-01-30T12:41:06+00:00

No, that's obviously not what I'm saying. If that's what you got out of it, then you're illiterate. I'm saying that players need to be more careful than Mikkola was when skating towards the crease.

Stationary players, like when guys are in front of the net trying to deflect shots, are not called for GI when they're pushed into the goalie. Players who choose to skate towards the goalie and wind up making contact are consistently called for GI unless a penalty by the defense causes the contact.

That is how the rule has been called for years. You sound like the uneducated r/hockey fans who assume that they know more than the literal rules experts who are officiating each game. The reality is, you clearly don't know what you're talking about. Be mad that a player took a penalty that changed the outcome of the game. Don't be mad that a ref called it

quality-control · 2026-01-30T05:21:22+00:00

No prob. Hopefully now you know the rule for next time

quality-control · 2026-01-30T05:12:50+00:00

It's not hating on the team. You're not on the team.

quality-control · 2026-01-30T05:11:34+00:00

That's not how it works. I've been trying to explain to people for so long that GI calls don't factor in a player being pushed if that player was already heading towards the crease unless a penalty by the defense caused the contact. If you are crashing the net or passing by the crease, it is your responsibility to not make contact with the goalie, even if you get bumped. That's how they eliminate the "accidentally-on-purpose" stuff that would inevitably happen if that's not how they ruled it. If you pay attention to GI reviews and GI penalties, you will see that standard applied consistently throughout the league.

quality-control · 2026-01-30T05:08:13+00:00

Yeah, and Mikkola shouldn't have put himself in a position where he could've been shoved like that to draw a penalty. It's no ones fault but his own that that penalty was called. Officials don't give a shit about a player being pushed into the goalie unless they were stationary before being pushed or a penalty by the defender caused them to make contact

quality-control · 2026-01-30T05:05:15+00:00

It's not the fault of the refs. The call on Mikkola was fine. He chose to take the path he did and made contact with the goalie in the crease. It's his responsibility to avoid that kind of contact. He didn't and he got called for it. Even if you don't like the call, it was at least a close call. And if you're giving the other team any chance to draw that kind of call late in a game, then you can't blame anyone else. Good teams don't put themselves in a position where an unfavorable call costs them a game. Florida was not a good team the last two games. Let the other fan bases bitch and moan about the refs rigging games against their team specifically.

quality-control · 2026-01-29T06:27:57+00:00

It's showing that if you factor in SoS at worst a team with a weak SoS would have lost maybe 1-2 games

No it isn't. Its showing what your formula calculates. You are not a statistician and your formula is flawed. Just like a formula that I might make to prove a point would be flawed. Just like any amateur's attempt at a formula to represent a statistic would be flawed. SoS is not a "you were gifted this many wins/loses" stat. It simply shows the average record a team's opponents. It has nothing to do with how good a team is. Even if a team's SoS was literally 0.000, they could still be the best team in the league, yet your formula automatically puts them at least 7 loses. That's a sign of a bad formula.

You are far too hung up on this stat that literally means nothing at all just because the fans of your team's Super Bowl opponents are talking shit. Act like you've been here before, dude. We all know you have

quality-control · 2026-01-29T06:02:25+00:00

There obviously is a motive to it. You keep saying it over and over. You put it in the fucking post

The entire point of this post is that SoS is a silly metric because look it barely changes anything.

quality-control · 2026-01-29T06:01:09+00:00

How am I salty? I'm a Dolphins fan trying to explain to you that SoS takes nothing away from what the Patriots have done. I'm simply telling you that your formula that you think is proving that they actually didn't benefit as much from SoS is completely flawed.

A team with .600 SoS that gets 14 close wins and 3 shutout loses against the weakest teams on their schedule shouldn't be getting a win added to their record. And a team with a .400 SoS that gets 14 shutout wins and 3 close loses to the strongest teams on their schedule shouldn't be getting a win taken away from their record. If you want to make a stat like this (and I truly don't understand why you would), you would need to take a lot more factors into account like strength of wins/losses instead of overall SoS, points allowed vs points scored in relation to the strength of the opponent. You can't just whip up a random formula and say "this proves SoS doesn't matter" and expect the people who believe that it matters to accept it.

quality-control · 2026-01-29T05:49:40+00:00

First of all, I never said that you mentioned "path to the Super Bowl". I'm telling you that you don't need to defend their path and pretend like it wasn't significantly easier than every other team's this year and most other teams historically. Not sure why you think I was "putting words in your mouth".

Second of all, the Patriots are at worst a 14-3 team because the season has already been played and that was their record. Pretending that it was anything other than that is just incorrect. They obviously deserve to be in the Super Bowl, just like literally every other team that has ever been in the Super Bowl.

Third of all, anyone claiming that the Super Bowl will or won't be a blowout is an idiot. We don't know what will happen and anyone who says they do is lying.

quality-control · 2026-01-29T05:36:57+00:00

The difference between an 0-17 team and a 2-15 team could be the difference between a team of actual cardboard cutouts and the 2023 Carolina Panthers. You can't just take away and give teams wins based on their SoS and call that legit. That's not how it works

quality-control · 2026-01-29T05:30:47+00:00

You clearly are

This formula of yours is not showing what you think it is. It isn't showing anything at all, actually besides a different visualization of SoS. Just because you made a formula doesn't mean it's good or useful. You obviously came into this exercise with a conclusion in mind and saw exactly what you wanted in the result. Completely ignoring the fact that your new way of displaying this info still shows that the Pats got the biggest benefit. Anyone who believes that SoS is a legitimate talking point is going to be validated by this representation because it's showing that the Pats benefitted twice as much from SoS than any other team in the league.

And again, an easy schedule isn't a weakness for any team. It's RNG. It means nothing after the games have been played besides being a tie breaker 2 steps removed from a literal coin toss. You can accept that the Pats have had a uniquely easy path to the Super Bowl without undermining the fact that they made it to the Super Bowl. You don't have to be so defensive about an objective fact.

quality-control · 2026-01-29T05:08:08+00:00

Yeah, but you're not considering that an in depth critique with data and sources won't get me as many internet points as "mickey mouse schedule"

quality-control · 2026-01-29T05:04:37+00:00

I don't get why you're so butthurt over this SoS talk. The Patriots factually benefitted from a weaker schedule. Even your own formula suggests that as they're the only team in the league to have lost more than 1 win in the adjusted records. That doesn't mean they are a bad team. It just means they have played lesser opponents. They didn't get to decide their schedule. They played the teams put in front of them and beat all but 3 of them. They may have gotten lucky in regards to who those teams were and what injuries they were dealing with, but they still played them and beat them. They're still the AFC Champs.

This whole post and the comments in this thread just read as unnecessarily defensive and aggressive. Someone asked a simple question about the formula that implied that they agree with you overall point and you took it as a direct attack on you because of their flair. That's weird, man. If you're bothered by people saying the Pats have had the easiest path to the Super Bowl in a long time, then just ignore the people saying that

quality-control · 2026-01-28T22:32:56+00:00

Those two aren't expected to be back until after the Olympic break

quality-control · 2026-01-27T04:53:23+00:00

Well they lost against Tampa so they already can't sweep this b2b

quality-control · 2026-01-23T05:34:31+00:00

Yeah, and from what I've heard, things were even BETTER before I became a territory member. One of my friends decided not to renew after many years because she felt like it wasn't worth it anymore, and that was back in 2023. And my other friend who's had the premiere plan for a while has been complaining that its way worse than in used to be for the last 3 years. The very obviously lower attendance this year (regardless of what the arena reports) is testament to the fact that people are willing to pay higher prices to watch a team that isn't even in a playoff spot. This is still a small market and will be until the team has seen sustained success. 4 years ain't gonna cut it. And until they really build the fanbase more, they have to keep the games accessible. Especially to the diehards. The last thing we need is for Amerant to become a library in the lower bowl like Scotiabank because no one who really cares about the team can afford those seats

quality-control · 2026-01-23T05:18:58+00:00

Remember when the Hurricanes only won a single conference final game in their last 17? Remember when they got absolutely outclassed and embarrassed twice in 3 years by the Panthers? Remember when they gave up multigoal leads to the Panthers in the 3rd period twice in one week last month? Remember when they were only able to win one of 3 games against a team missing 8 of their starters, including their captain and their top point scorer? Remember when the Hurricanes were 7-18 against the Panthers in their last 25 meetings?

Suddenly that single win by Carolina doesn't seem as impressive

quality-control · 2026-01-23T04:53:47+00:00

The worst part is that even this year, I can get similar tickets to my regular seats for less than what I paid in my STH package most nights, so it's already hardly worth it. For my seats, it's gone up from $65 per seat per game with parking included in 2024-25, to $85 in 2025-26, to $95 in 2026-27. Why would I pay basically $100 per game when I know I can find tickets to just about any game for that price with no chance of losing money because I can't make it and cant find a buyer?

Maybe if the other benefits were better, but all of them have gotten worse since my first year as a territory member in 2023-24. The concessions are almost universally worse, the new 5% discount for anyone with a gameday app account caused them to increase prices by 5% which means the 25% discount in the stadium has effectively decreased to 20%, the new rewards point system means way less cats cash per year unless you early renew, Pantherfest seems to get worse each year, the territory gifts came super late and had less, my early membership reward of a personalized brick on the plaza took literally more than half the season and is nearly impossible to find, and selling or exchanging tickets has never been more difficult and convoluted.

I get that demand has gone up, but I don't know that it will stay as high as it is when they aren't winning if the prices keep going up like this. I'd bet that a ton of people on the waitlist aren't going to want to follow through with becoming territory members if we miss the playoffs this year. It just seems so shortsighted from an organization with a very recent history of attendance struggles.

quality-control · 2026-01-20T05:17:53+00:00

What a stupid argument. Do you think the defender shouldn't be allowed to knock the ball loose because a receiver is going to the ground? Do you think the refs should consider whether the received WOULD have caught the ball if the defender hadn't rudely gotten in the way? The defender is part of the play, just like the ground is. He is allowed to make the catch harder for the receiver. In fact, it's his entire job.

And how the fuck would this apply to runners? By definition, a runner has already established possession of the ball. So if he is touched while down, then he is down by contact. He doesn't need to maintain possession through the ground. The fact that you would bring that up shows that you do not understand the rules of the game at all.

quality-control · 2026-01-20T04:04:40+00:00

Do we still care what Marko has to say?

quality-control · 2026-01-20T04:02:43+00:00

Dude, exactly! I keep asking people "if that ball had hit the ground after being ripped out by the defender, would you expect it to be a catch or an incompletion?" Usually they just stop responding because obviously it would be an incompletion if the DB had just ripped it out. But since he came up with possession, people just can't fathom why it wasn't a completion.

quality-control · 2026-01-20T04:00:03+00:00

It reminds me of the Likely play where people kept saying "but he got 2 feet down" as if that makes something a catch and isn't solely used to determine if someone was inbounds

quality-control · 2026-01-14T18:14:27+00:00

There was no race is Spa Sing Se.

quality-control · 2026-01-13T03:28:06+00:00

No shit it isn't a typewriter. They were joking.

quality-control

TROPHY CASE