Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19:
Eisen is also fantastic.
Rich Eisen is the gold standard of broadcasting to me.
I really, really don't like that the sports media world has become this 24/7 news talking head bullshit, but if I have to watch someone to get their opinion, I'm watching Rich Eisen. [Reply]
Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19:
LOL, I would argue it's becoming more sustainable because like New England, it's becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The Chiefs expect good things to happen in close games, opponents expect to make mistakes against them.
Teams are getting caught up in the pinstripes and banners.
Originally Posted by :
The phenomenon was first described in a study titled "Quitters Never Win: The (Adverse) Incentive Effects of Competing with Superstars"[1] by Jennifer Brown, which examined the performance of golfers at events with and without Tiger Woods. In contradiction to what intuition would suggest (namely that increased rivalry encourages better performance), Brown found that the presence of a superstar was, in fact, associated with reduced competitor’s efforts in rank-order tournaments. The explanation she provides is an economic model in which competing is costly - one might hurt themselves, for instance - thus when the chance of winning is very low, the participant is discouraged from performing to their best abilities, as it is not worthwhile.
The study uses data from the Professional Golfers' Association (PGA) that contains round-by-round scores for all players in every tournament from 1999 to 2006 and hole-by-hole results for all events from 2002 to 2006. During this period, golfer Tiger Woods was performing significantly better than any other player, with scores in regular and major events being lower than the group mean in all years except 2004.[1] His consistent and dominant performance earned him the title of superstar. Hence, the data is filtered creating a subset of tournaments Tiger Woods was a part of and other players' performances are compared to when they were competing against Woods to when they were not. The analysis yields that on events when the highly skilled golfers were competing against Tiger Woods, their performance was considerably worse - with scores almost one stroke higher on average - than on events where Tiger Woods was absent. On the other hand, lower-ranked golfers are less or not at all affected by his presence. Brown notes that this could be due to the fact that the stakes are not as high for lower-ranked golfers to start with.
The officials thing goes both ways. Maybe a bad call there but then they called 17 on the next Falcons drive.
Then you look at the Bills and Packers games last year. Just the first 2 that come to mind. I'm sure there's more. The Chiefs don't "get all the calls in critical situations". They get fucked here and there and they benefit here and there like every other team in the league. [Reply]