Poll

[teeray]

Hindsight bias, also known as the knew-it-all-along effect or creeping determinism, is the inclination, after an event has occurred, to see the event as having been predictable, despite there having been little or no objective basis for predicting it, prior to its occurrence. It is a multifaceted phenomenon that can affect different stages of designs, processes, contexts, and situations. Hindsight bias may cause memory distortion, where the recollection and reconstruction of content can lead to false theoretical outcomes. It has been suggested that the effect can cause extreme methodological problems while trying to analyze, understand, and interpret results in experimental studies. A basic example of the hindsight bias is when, after viewing the outcome of a potentially unforeseeable event, a person believes he or she "knew it all along". Such examples are present in the writings of historians describing outcomes of battles, physicians recalling clinical trials, and in judicial systems trying to attribute responsibility and predictability of accidents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindsight_bias

This is exactly what I think of when people complain about OCs.

Not Shula specifically, but all fan bases that complain about playcalling, decisions, etc

[CelibatePimp]

You can't spin this any other way. Rivera made a terrible decision, akin to the Bills game last season where we lost. We would have lost this one also, after all the effort guys put in, had it not been for the missed FG. If you play safe, you always lose.

 

I thought RR had learned his lesson, apparently not.

[BuffaloBills62]

Outsiders take for those of you who do not care...

 

Young team + close division + early in the season = yes.

[Billy Love]

Yes....simple and plain!

[Guild]

But you are leaving out the fact we still had 20 yards to the endzone. Average the Bengels redzone defense and our redzone TD% and you get a relatively unlikely probability. That we score a touchdown. When dealing with probability you also must multiply the probability of converting the 4th down by the probability of scoring a TD. That's the only way I know how to break that down. And honestly, while I think they should be separated , in the context of the argument you can't.

 

Even with 50 yards to go on fourth and two we would have had a greater chance of winning the game.

[CPcavedweller]

Even with 50 yards to go on fourth and two we would have had a greater chance of winning the game.

I really disagree. If I was more of a statistics need I would break it down into something meaningful but that's far too advanced for me to even attempt.

Agree to disagree.