The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Redskin in Canada wrote:

AZHog wrote:Houston

Only difference between your picks and mine.

You'll never catch up that way, AZHog. Especially picking Houston to win.

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:I think it should come down to one week, the last week. Sudden death.

Afraid of yet others catching up with you Redeemed?

Let's wait to see what Texas Hog has to say. I am equally fine with chopping off weeks (top and bottom) to expand the number of participants. Unlike someone else, I am not affraid of or raise issues of "integrity" or other pretexts about every single issue that comes around.

We have a couple of bets Redeemed. I suggest you and I concentrate on those two for the time being. If you do not beat me, you win NOTHING, NADA, RIEN. So, dance with me Redimido.

Talking about thgis topic, Where are those "perfect" picks?

JSPB22 wrote:Personally, I can see the advantages to dropping the low score, and even possibly the top score from each poster, but to drop 8 weeks is absurd. That is half the season.

It would have to be top and bottom to make it fair. If you only drop the lowest score you are helping someone unduly, and if you only drop the highest, you are pounishing them. So, if any drops are done at all, it would have to be an even number.

I agree that the lower the number of weeks (or sample) becomes, the less statistically significant the result becomes. Absurd? I do not know. But less significant, definitely yes. Let's wait and see what Texas Hog has to say.

But I am on record to try to encourage the participation and competition of a larger number of posters. Cinsidering that I am ahead of everybody else by a small but significant margin this late in the season. I am more on the side of making the competing more interesting rather than just winning as gratifying as that might be in itself.

Don't do anything that takes the mickey out of it... and personally I don't think you should do anything that punishes those that jumped in from the start.

One week would be my actual recommendation, like I said, seems like a fair advantage to ALL qualifying if they get to drop that worst week (especially when it's a zero).

I'm gonna jack up the stakes even more... because I'm really enjoying the fun of seeing you all take this entriely too seriously...

WHOMEVER is the top hognosticator, will also have the added 'bragging rights' of us using their picks in next year's Hognostication articles (if they so choose). Next season.... every week we will have TH's Hognostications but they will also be versus whomever wins this year's belt. Make any sense?

I think it'd be cool if every year the 'Hognostications panel' grew by one member... the member who took home the gold the year before. In a few years we'd have a rock-star panel of pickers... maybe.

Waddya think? Too hokey?

admin wrote:Don't do anything that takes the mickey out of it... and personally I don't think you should do anything that punishes those that jumped in from the start.

One week would be my actual recommendation, like I said, seems like a fair advantage to ALL qualifying if they get to drop that worst week (especially when it's a zero).

I'm gonna jack up the stakes even more... because I'm really enjoying the fun of seeing you all take this entriely too seriously...

WHOMEVER is the top hognosticator, will also have the added 'bragging rights' of us using their picks in next year's Hognostication articles (if they so choose). Next season.... every week we will have TH's Hognostications but they will also be versus whomever wins this year's belt. Make any sense?

I think it'd be cool if every year the 'Hognostications panel' grew by one member... the member who took home the gold the year before. In a few years we'd have a rock-star panel of pickers... maybe.

Waddya think? Too hokey?

I love it!

Let's go with dropping the one week low score to bring in more people...as I understand it.

Also, I'm not to be considered in competition for the prizes. My record is for comparative and bragging rights purposes only. The prize goes to the person with the best record, other than the staff Hognosticator.

If the same person wins year in and year out, then the panel wouldn't grow, but I like the idea anyway.

admin wrote:I'm gonna jack up the stakes even more... because I'm really enjoying the fun of seeing you all take this entriely too seriously...

WHOMEVER is the top hognosticator, will also have the added 'bragging rights' of us using their picks in next year's Hognostication articles (if they so choose). Next season.... every week we will have TH's Hognostications but they will also be versus whomever wins this year's belt. Make any sense?

I think it'd be cool if every year the 'Hognostications panel' grew by one member... the member who took home the gold the year before. In a few years we'd have a rock-star panel of pickers... maybe.

Waddya think? Too hokey?

how about making it a bit more open next year. instead of having this year's winner submit picks for all 17 weeks next year, perhaps the winner from the previous week picks along side the hognostocator (i.e. whomever wins week 1 gets to have their picks along the hognosticator for week 2). that way, you'll have more people getting the chance to shine (or be embarrassed), more competition, more faces, and a competition to see who can stay at the 'top' for the most successive weeks in a row. just a thought.

admin wrote:Why not just drop the WORST week and the BEST week from everyone?

DO NOT TAKE AWAY MY BEST WEEK! I may never go 14-2 again! I don't really feel it necessary to throw myself into the mix of the competing Hognositcators who started at the beginning of the year. I started ½ way through and fully appreciate that my chances of becoming top Hognositicator are only slightly above nil. Just don't take away my best week! Even if you take the best weeks off everyone else, I know I still won't be close enough to cause serious threat. I'm just happy besting those I do (especially the ones who think they are gods' gift to hognosticating) and remaining at NOT THE BOTTOM. Thanks for listening!

admin wrote:I'm gonna jack up the stakes even more... because I'm really enjoying the fun of seeing you all take this entriely too seriously...

WHOMEVER is the top hognosticator, will also have the added 'bragging rights' of us using their picks in next year's Hognostication articles (if they so choose). Next season.... every week we will have TH's Hognostications but they will also be versus whomever wins this year's belt. Make any sense?

I think it'd be cool if every year the 'Hognostications panel' grew by one member... the member who took home the gold the year before. In a few years we'd have a rock-star panel of pickers... maybe.

Waddya think? Too hokey?

In all seriousness, I think this is a pretty neat idea, and one I wholly support.

In the past couple of weeks, this competition has gotten a lot more interesting. More people have submitted picks along with commentray justifying their picks, and some make some pretty good observations/comments, i.e. "The Home Depot Toilet Bowl":lol:), and I think it would be nice to have the winner rewarded with the opportunity to provide their take on next season's games.

While my chances of making the (admittedly) improbable run at the title are slim to none, I am confident that any of the people currently in the mix near the top of the competition would be more than worthy and able to provide input on weekly games next season, and it would be a nice reward for sticking it through the entire (whateever length is decided) season.

Great idea, BH.

*****END TRANSMISSION*****

And now back to more of my bold (outrageous) claims:

YES! FOLLOWING MY METEORIC RISE FROM THE ASHES MY HOGNOSTICATIONS WILL BE FEATURED ON THN ALONG WITH TEXAS HOG'S NEXT SEASON!!!!!

jspb22 wrote:If the same person wins year in and year out, then the panel wouldn't grow, but I like the idea anyway.

If the same guy wins every year, we don't need another expert... we already have the best one.

joebagadonuts wrote: how about making it a bit more open next year. instead of having this year's winner submit picks for all 17 weeks next year, perhaps the winner from the previous week picks along side the hognostocator (i.e. whomever wins week 1 gets to have their picks along the hognosticator for week 2). that way, you'll have more people getting the chance to shine (or be embarrassed), more competition, more faces, and a competition to see who can stay at the 'top' for the most successive weeks in a row. just a thought.

While I like the idea, I have to think about planning and being able to count on a commitment, so I think crowning a champion and asking them to commit to something is a more realistic way of ensuring that the piece is consistent.

But I do like the idea... maybe we could combine the ideas... what if we had a head-to-head-to-head weekly 'match-up'? The Hognosticator himself, TH... The crowned hognosticator champion, AND the week before's hognosticator?

admin wrote:what if we had a head-to-head-to-head weekly 'match-up'? The Hognosticator himself, TH... The crowned hognosticator champion, AND the week before's hognosticator?

And, in the offseason, we can ask CLL to run his franchise in Madden, and we can have the previous season's winners come back for a special Tournament of Hognostications Champions.

Year-round Hognostications!!!!!

JSPB22 wrote:If the same person wins year in and year out, then the panel wouldn't grow, but I like the idea anyway.

Just a thought, but s year's winner being featured in the article would IMHO give them the same status as TH in the 'for comparative purposes only' boat, thus allowing for a different winner every year.

All of these ideas are sounding very good to me--it could certainly add a lot to this site.


Whatever rule changes happen for this season, I don't think that I should have a chance at winning it all. Not that I would even if we dropped enough weeks for me to be in it; but I just agree with JSPB that it would be absurd to drop more than 1 or at most 2 weeks.

Then again, I'm really not in the contest anymore, but that's my .

admin wrote:While I like the idea, I have to think about planning and being able to count on a commitment, so I think crowning a champion and asking them to commit to something is a more realistic way of ensuring that the piece is consistent.

understandable. you'd have to track down a different person each week to get their picks. probably not fun. perhaps just mentioning last week's winner in the hognostications column is enough reward and incentive.

I am in agreement with the consensus building in this thread. We drop one game, the lowest, among those who have submitted all weeks, to allow others to come in. I am fine with that.

As long as there is commitment, I also agree with three Hognosticators: the official Texas Hog, the annual champ, and the weekly champ.

Let's bring it on.

By the way, I have not bad but worse news Redeemed. Joebagadonuts just passed you number of wins today if we drop your lowest weekly score.

This is just a thought that could combine the ideas here:


What if the weekly winner had a chance to have his / her hognostications in the official article; provided that they get their picks in by a certain time (i.e. Tuesday afternoon at 4). If they don't, they'll still get mentioned. There could also be stipulations on the format for how they get their picks in, just so it isn't too much additional work / worries for BH.

If there's a tie at the top, then they just get mentioned. (Perhaps? Ties are tricky).

Just a thought.

Redskin in Canada wrote:By the way, I have not bad but worse news Redeemed. Joebagadonuts just passed you number of wins today if we drop your lowest weekly score.

I have nothing but love for joebagadonuts. He's a sweet individual, available in powdered, glazed, and jelly-filled.

Let's see if you keep laughing after my perfecto this week.

Redskin in Canada wrote:I am in agreement with the consensus building in this thread. We drop one game, the lowest, among those who have submitted all weeks, to allow others to come in. I am fine with that.

As long as there is commitment, I also agree with three Hognosticators: the official Texas Hog, the annual champ, and the weekly champ.

Let's bring it on.

By the way, I have not bad but worse news Redeemed. Joebagadonuts just passed you number of wins today if we drop your lowest weekly score.

So what's the leaderboard look like if we drop the low week?

FanfromAnnapolis wrote:If there's a tie at the top, then they just get mentioned. (Perhaps? Ties are tricky).

Just a thought.

Anyone see how ESPN ran their celebrity picks contest last year? More than W-L record, it was points-based, meaning positive points per win, negative (I think) for a loss, and a "stone cold lock" pick which could either earn you extra points or take them away if you are wrong.

Oh, accountant, did you see this last year at all? It might be one way of avoiding ties, and giving others the opportunity to make comebacks from week to week.

Just a thought.

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:

FanfromAnnapolis wrote:If there's a tie at the top, then they just get mentioned. (Perhaps? Ties are tricky).

Just a thought.

Anyone see how ESPN ran their celebrity picks contest last year? More than W-L record, it was points-based, meaning positive points per win, negative (I think) for a loss, and a "stone cold lock" pick which could either earn you extra points or take them away if you are wrong.

Oh, accountant, did you see this last year at all? It might be one way of avoiding ties, and giving others the opportunity to make comebacks from week to week.

Just a thought.

I run a work pool where we rank the games from 1 to whatever the number of games is that week. So if I am supremely confident that the 'Skins will kick Arizona butt this Sunday, I would put my 16 by the Redskins, then a 15 by my next surest bet. We haven't had a tie in three years now, but it is a lot more work for the organizer/accountant.

JSPB22 wrote:

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:

FanfromAnnapolis wrote:If there's a tie at the top, then they just get mentioned. (Perhaps? Ties are tricky).

Just a thought.

Anyone see how ESPN ran their celebrity picks contest last year? More than W-L record, it was points-based, meaning positive points per win, negative (I think) for a loss, and a "stone cold lock" pick which could either earn you extra points or take them away if you are wrong.

Oh, accountant, did you see this last year at all? It might be one way of avoiding ties, and giving others the opportunity to make comebacks from week to week.

Just a thought.

I run a work pool where we rank the games from 1 to whatever the number of games is that week. So if I am supremely confident that the 'Skins will kick Arizona butt this Sunday, I would put my 16 by the Redskins, then a 15 by my next surest bet. We haven't had a tie in three years now, but it is a lot more work for the organizer/accountant.

And more work for people making suggestions. I've run in pools like that before, and it takes me 3 times as long to make my picks. Something else to think about.

Another thought--tiebreakers can go to the person with the best overall record on the season. If that's a tie, then you could look to whoever had the best record over just the past 2 weeks, then 3 weeks, etc. until you had a winner.

I thin we should start this week and spot staff members 5 correct picks each week.

Ooh, I'm in.

Chicago at Pittsburgh
Pick: Steelers

Cleveland at Cincinnati
Pick: Bengals

Houston at Tennessee
Pick: Zzzzzzz*snork* huhn? wha? oh, Titans

Indianapolis at Jacksonville
Pick: Colts

New England at Buffalo
Pick: Pats

Oakland at N.Y. Jets
Pick: Raiders

St. Louis at Minnesota
Pick: Vikings

Tampa Bay at Carolina
Pick: Panthers

N.Y. Giants at Philadelphia
Pick: Giants

San Francisco at Seattle
Pick: Seahawks

Washington at Arizona
Pick: Skins

Baltimore at Denver
Pick: Broncos

Kansas City at Dallas
Pick: Chiefs

Miami at San Diego
Pick: Chargers

Detroit at Green Bay
Pick: Detroit

New Orleans at Atlanta
Pick: Atlanta

OK, after a very pleasing start last week, here are my picks for this week. Had real trouble with some of my picks this week - there seem to be a number of games that you can end up trying to out think yourself:

Pittsburgh
Cincinnati
Tennessee
Indianapolis
Buffalo
Oakland
Minnesota
Carolina
NY Giants
Seattle
Washington
Denver
Kansas City
San Diego
Green Bay
Atlanta