2016 NFL 33 BIF

Discussion in 'Beer It Forward' started by Dave_Treat, Aug 15, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dave_Treat

    Dave_Treat Pooh-Bah (2,287) Jun 23, 2012 Virginia
    Pooh-Bah Trader

    Wow! Another winner! @tommyguz with Carolina gets at least a share of the pot.

    3 out of 4 weeks. ..
     
    Damian74 and tommyguz like this.
  2. valrxman

    valrxman Pundit (795) Jun 30, 2010 Florida
    Trader

    Boom. Carolina
     
    tommyguz likes this.
  3. RuckIt

    RuckIt Pundit (940) Apr 29, 2008 Massachusetts
    Trader

    Congrats!

    I think next time we should go with something other than 33 points...
     
  4. Damian74

    Damian74 Initiate (0) Dec 7, 2012 South Carolina

    It used to be a rare occurrence, but now with more two point conversions and more missed extra points we're seeing it more. Maybe 44 club next year....
     
  5. psbhockey12

    psbhockey12 Initiate (0) Apr 2, 2013 Pennsylvania

    Rushing
     
  6. Aleforme

    Aleforme Initiate (0) Nov 26, 2008 Washington

    tommyguz likes this.
  7. tommyguz

    tommyguz Pooh-Bah (2,534) May 14, 2008 Pennsylvania
    Pooh-Bah Trader

    Yeah it used to take weeks to hit 33. I think bc of the xtra point change it got easier

    We need to look and see what number is more rare
     
    Damian74 likes this.
  8. psbhockey12

    psbhockey12 Initiate (0) Apr 2, 2013 Pennsylvania

    FTFY
     
    landrewg and tommyguz like this.
  9. Dave_Treat

    Dave_Treat Pooh-Bah (2,287) Jun 23, 2012 Virginia
    Pooh-Bah Trader

    I went back through all the scores for a couple of years, and I really think this is just a factor of higher powered offences.

    I'm not a fan of going with 44 or some other high number, as some teams just suck and won't put up that many scores.

    At the end of the season, or maybe after 33 hits 4 times, we can try another number.
     
  10. Dicers

    Dicers Grand Pooh-Bah (3,436) Sep 2, 2012 California
    Society Pooh-Bah Trader

    29 May be an option? I agree though I don't think going higher is an option. 33 is already a stretch for about 6-8 teams
     
    kayakandbeer and Damian74 like this.
  11. psbhockey12

    psbhockey12 Initiate (0) Apr 2, 2013 Pennsylvania

    Sheer boredom I ran through the 2015 season ...
    10 ~ 26
    11 ~ 0
    12 ~ 7
    13 ~ 23
    14 ~ 17
    15 ~ 3
    16 ~ 18
    17 ~ 31
    18 ~ 8
    19 ~ 15
    20 ~ 47
    21 ~ 15
    22 ~ 8
    23 ~ 24
    24 ~ 30
    25 ~ 6
    26 ~ 14
    27 ~ 33
    28 ~ 13
    29 ~ 7
    30 ~ 21
    31 ~ 17
    32 ~ 5
    33 ~ 12
    34 ~ 16
    35 ~ 8
    36 ~ 3
    37 ~ 7
    38 ~ 13
    39 ~ 6
    40 ~ 2
    41 ~ 2
    42 ~ 4
    43 ~ 1
    44 ~ 2
    45 ~ 4
    46 ~ 0
    47 ~ 2
    48 ~ 2
    49 ~ 2
    50 ~ 0
    As stupid as it may seem ... would something low like 15 be a possibility? Only hit 3 times last year and even the high scoring teams have off weeks, deal with injuries, or just a tough D.
     
    #171 psbhockey12, Oct 4, 2016
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2016
  12. tommyguz

    tommyguz Pooh-Bah (2,534) May 14, 2008 Pennsylvania
    Pooh-Bah Trader

    How many times did 15 or 36 hit this year?
     
  13. Aleforme

    Aleforme Initiate (0) Nov 26, 2008 Washington

    It looks like 15 hit once and 36 has not hit yet. This is from a very quick unofficial skimming of week 1 to 4 scores on Yahoo.
     
  14. chewymangos

    chewymangos Initiate (0) Jun 12, 2014 Indiana

    The XP being moved back has changed scoring around quite a bit so anything before last year I think is data that won't help.
     
    Damian74 and Summer78 like this.
  15. Dicers

    Dicers Grand Pooh-Bah (3,436) Sep 2, 2012 California
    Society Pooh-Bah Trader

    Eh I don't like 15, very dependent on FGs or a safety. likelihood of 2 TD's with BOTH XP missed is slim
     
  16. psbhockey12

    psbhockey12 Initiate (0) Apr 2, 2013 Pennsylvania

    Could also be TD with 2pt conversion and a TD with extra pt ... not dependent on FG's or safety
     
  17. oldmetalguy

    oldmetalguy Initiate (0) Dec 25, 2015 Pennsylvania

    if there is any consideration of changing the number, what should be the goal though?

    lots of teams can score 3 touchdowns a game, for some, 4 is even easy.

    the question is, whatever number it is, how often does it hit?

    if it hits one time (or zero) per round of being on the clock, i don't think that's out of the realm, at least I'm assuming, since by joining something like this it's "probable" you will be sending some beer, with a much smaller chance of receiving some beer if your team hits?

    make the number at least 1 more touchdown higher? maybe no one hits
    make it lower and a more difficult combination of 2 & 3 & 7? maybe no one hits, maybe more than 2 hit

    with more common 2 point conversions, it becomes more difficult to find the rare number

    I'm not pro or con on changing it, only with the opinion that 1 or 0 hits per round seems ok if it corrects itself in the next round

    not hitting for 3 rounds and then someone in the last group getting a truckload of beer probably isn't ideal either, but man... what a sight it would be :grimacing:
     
  18. Dave_Treat

    Dave_Treat Pooh-Bah (2,287) Jun 23, 2012 Virginia
    Pooh-Bah Trader

    I like 11...

    Really, lets wait and see what happens. If we hit 33 again this weekend, we'll make a decision. The real goal was that it didn't hit often, whereas someone might send 16 boxes. Always the intent that we all ship beer at some point. Lots of options.

    Either way, we'll also need to decide if we go a full round, or do something like everyone on the clock for rest of season and all winners split the spoils, or something in between.

    Welcome for suggestions...
     
  19. Damian74

    Damian74 Initiate (0) Dec 7, 2012 South Carolina

    But think if that just hit once or twice that would be epic boxes crashing some lucky porches.
     
  20. kayakandbeer

    kayakandbeer Zealot (708) Aug 16, 2013 Florida
    Trader

    Got a box from @valrxman. Will post **** later.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.