Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

How can anyone justify Moore over Clausen at this point?


  • Please log in to reply
335 replies to this topic

#166 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,461 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 12 October 2010 - 12:40 AM

So it doesn't matter that 1 out of every 10 passes you throw is an interception?


Not if 4 out of every 10 passes you throw is a touchdown. Using isolated stats like you are out of context is why people say stats are meaningless. It isn't the numbers themselves but how they are used. So throwing an Int every 10 passes may or may not be relevant. That is why things like TD to Int ratio is a better statistic than Ints alone. So if you throw 200 passes and 20 are interceptions but 80 are TDs, does that make you good or bad? How about if you throw 200 times and 3 are INTs and 1 is a TD, does that make you better or worse than the first quarterback??

#167 CatMan72

CatMan72

    KEEP POUNDING

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,911 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 06:04 AM

Not if 4 out of every 10 passes you throw is a touchdown. Using isolated stats like you are out of context is why people say stats are meaningless. It isn't the numbers themselves but how they are used. So throwing an Int every 10 passes may or may not be relevant. That is why things like TD to Int ratio is a better statistic than Ints alone. So if you throw 200 passes and 20 are interceptions but 80 are TDs, does that make you good or bad? How about if you throw 200 times and 3 are INTs and 1 is a TD, does that make you better or worse than the first quarterback??


Okay, so what if 10% of the passes you attempted were interceptions while 3.5% of the passes you attempted were TD's?

Is that good QB play?

#168 WhiteKnight

WhiteKnight

    Junior Member

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 07:00 AM

Why don't we just play without a QB?
Direct snaps to RB's and a RB that could pass the ball if necessary.
I know, it sounds really stupid, but look at our statistics.
Could have an additional blocking back that way.

#169 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,461 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 12 October 2010 - 07:05 AM

Okay, so what if 10% of the passes you attempted were interceptions while 3.5% of the passes you attempted were TD's?

Is that good QB play?


No one is talking good versus bad, we are talking whether the guy gives you a better chance to win or not. They are very different. And all interceptions are not the same. One thrown in the redzone while you are driving for points or a pick 6 hurts you a lot more than a 40 yard heave at the end of the half or a hail mary which gets intercepted at the end of the game.

No one is going to say for example that Moore has played well by any stretch of the imagination yet when the alternative is a rookie who is unable to throw the ball down the field, go through his reads, or attack the middle of the field then the guy with the turnovers still has the better potential to win particularly when he has shown the ability to do it in the past.

On Sirous NFl Peter King was pointing out do you keep Favre in there last night or go with Tavaris Jackson? The reality is that Favre can screw it up like he did with a pick but he also can make throws Jackson just can't so despite the picks he gives you a better chance to win. The same type of analogy applies with Moore and Clausen. Clausen can'r make the throws Moore can and has shown no ability to drive the team. So despite the picks you go with the proven winner versus the guy who has shown nothing.

#170 CatMan72

CatMan72

    KEEP POUNDING

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,911 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 08:25 AM

No one is talking good versus bad, we are talking whether the guy gives you a better chance to win or not. They are very different. And all interceptions are not the same. One thrown in the redzone while you are driving for points or a pick 6 hurts you a lot more than a 40 yard heave at the end of the half or a hail mary which gets intercepted at the end of the game.

No one is going to say for example that Moore has played well by any stretch of the imagination yet when the alternative is a rookie who is unable to throw the ball down the field, go through his reads, or attack the middle of the field then the guy with the turnovers still has the better potential to win particularly when he has shown the ability to do it in the past.

On Sirous NFl Peter King was pointing out do you keep Favre in there last night or go with Tavaris Jackson? The reality is that Favre can screw it up like he did with a pick but he also can make throws Jackson just can't so despite the picks he gives you a better chance to win. The same type of analogy applies with Moore and Clausen. Clausen can'r make the throws Moore can and has shown no ability to drive the team. So despite the picks you go with the proven winner versus the guy who has shown nothing.


LOL, this is ridiculous - you're arguing in circles to avoid the simple fact that a QB who throws an interception on 10% of the passes he attempts vs. a TD on 3.5% of the passes he attempts (Matt Moore) does not give us a better chance to win.

You CANNOT WIN with a QB who throws a pick 10% of the time, plain and simple. Not even Brett Farve - one of the winningest turnover machines of all time can win games for you throwing a pick 10% of the time.

In the example I gave earlier QB # 1 was Jake Delhomme in 2009, QB # 2 was Matt Moore in 2010 and QB # 3 was Jimmy Clausen in 2010. Anyone who is not a blind Moore homer can see that Clausen has outperformed him overall (lower TD to INT ratio) ...AND CLAUSEN IS A FRIGGIN ROOKIE!

Yes, Clausen throws 2% fewer TD's per passing attempt but he also throws 7% fewer interceptions per passing attempt and has a higher completion percentage. Clausen has thrown for 5.0 YPC this year and Moore has thrown for 5.8 YPC this year, so you're tell me that .8 YPC difference makes Moore a better QB?

We can't argue winning records this year because neither of them have one, and don't tell me about what Moore did last year playing in relief, it's irrelevant at this point.

You also have to factor in that Clausen is a rookie and Moore is a 4 year vet and has had the benefit of being in this offense and throwing to many of these same players for much longer than Clausen.

Clausen may not be moving the offense very well, but Moore is a liability. I'll take the guy who doesn't turn the ball over 1 out of every 10 passing attempts and focus on my running game and my defense to win.

/thread

Edited by CatMan72, 12 October 2010 - 08:33 AM.


#171 Pox 08

Pox 08

    Luck of the Fryrish

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,317 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 08:41 AM

Our WRs looked lost most of the game, our Oline looked lost on a few plays. Clausen has looked lost, our Rbs outside of Dwill looked lost for much of the game. We've all seen Moore look lost out there, the beginning of the season, before Clausen even started.

Obviously it's not just one portion of the offense that is not working. The entire offense has yet to form any kind of chemistry for this season. They have not gelled. I'm a believer that the offense will gel eventually down the road, no matter who we have at qb. Since I think Moore is gone after this year, it should be Clausen under center, imo.

#172 Pox 08

Pox 08

    Luck of the Fryrish

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,317 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 08:56 AM

LOL, this is ridiculous - you're arguing in circles to avoid the simple fact that a QB who throws an interception on 10% of the passes he attempts vs. a TD on 3.5% of the passes he attempts (Matt Moore) does not give us a better chance to win.

You CANNOT WIN with a QB who throws a pick 10% of the time, plain and simple. Not even Brett Farve - one of the winningest turnover machines of all time can win games for you throwing a pick 10% of the time.

In the example I gave earlier QB # 1 was Jake Delhomme in 2009, QB # 2 was Matt Moore in 2010 and QB # 3 was Jimmy Clausen in 2010. Anyone who is not a blind Moore homer can see that Clausen has outperformed him overall (lower TD to INT ratio) ...AND CLAUSEN IS A FRIGGIN ROOKIE!

Yes, Clausen throws 2% fewer TD's per passing attempt but he also throws 7% fewer interceptions per passing attempt and has a higher completion percentage. Clausen has thrown for 5.0 YPC this year and Moore has thrown for 5.8 YPC this year, so you're tell me that .8 YPC difference makes Moore a better QB?

We can't argue winning records this year because neither of them have one, and don't tell me about what Moore did last year playing in relief, it's irrelevant at this point.

You also have to factor in that Clausen is a rookie and Moore is a 4 year vet and has had the benefit of being in this offense and throwing to many of these same players for much longer than Clausen.

Clausen may not be moving the offense very well, but Moore is a liability. I'll take the guy who doesn't turn the ball over 1 out of every 10 passing attempts and focus on my running game and my defense to win.

/thread



I agree.

Both Qbs look bad at this point. The difference being that Moore will try to make something out of nothing which leads to more interceptions. While Clausen seems to understand how horrible the entire offense has been and is just going through the emotions, trying not to turn the ball over.


Considering the fact that we suck no matter who starts at qb. I'd rather see less interceptions.

#173 Kral

Kral

    Internet Legend

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,828 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 09:07 AM

I agree.

Both Qbs look bad at this point. The difference being that Moore will try to make something out of nothing which leads to more interceptions. While Clausen seems to understand how horrible the entire offense has been and is just going through the emotions, trying not to turn the ball over.


Considering the fact that we suck no matter who starts at qb. I'd rather see less interceptions.


We're 0-5 and at this point very very very unlikely to make the playoffs. I'd rather 1) not make Clausen into another Carr like QB with horrible habits, 2) Have a guy out there that is going to try to make plays and allow others on the team to have a chance to make plays. Clausen isn't doing that right now he throws it away or checks down as though it were the first read, he also wasn't displaying much poise and confidence in the pocket in the Bears game.

#174 Third Degree

Third Degree

    Come back soon, 89

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,535 posts
  • Location704

Posted 12 October 2010 - 09:46 AM

We're 0-5 and at this point very very very unlikely to make the playoffs. I'd rather 1) not make Clausen into another Carr like QB with horrible habits, 2) Have a guy out there that is going to try to make plays and allow others on the team to have a chance to make plays. Clausen isn't doing that right now he throws it away or checks down as though it were the first read, he also wasn't displaying much poise and confidence in the pocket in the Bears game.


He was in the Saints game, and the Bengals game as well. And he wouldn't have had a turnover against CHI if Douchenozzle didn't grab the ball before it landed on the field.

#175 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,461 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 12 October 2010 - 09:53 AM

LOL, this is ridiculous - you're arguing in circles to avoid the simple fact that a QB who throws an interception on 10% of the passes he attempts vs. a TD on 3.5% of the passes he attempts (Matt Moore) does not give us a better chance to win.

You CANNOT WIN with a QB who throws a pick 10% of the time, plain and simple. Not even Brett Farve - one of the winningest turnover machines of all time can win games for you throwing a pick 10% of the time.

In the example I gave earlier QB # 1 was Jake Delhomme in 2009, QB # 2 was Matt Moore in 2010 and QB # 3 was Jimmy Clausen in 2010. Anyone who is not a blind Moore homer can see that Clausen has outperformed him overall (lower TD to INT ratio) ...AND CLAUSEN IS A FRIGGIN ROOKIE!

Yes, Clausen throws 2% fewer TD's per passing attempt but he also throws 7% fewer interceptions per passing attempt and has a higher completion percentage. Clausen has thrown for 5.0 YPC this year and Moore has thrown for 5.8 YPC this year, so you're tell me that .8 YPC difference makes Moore a better QB?

We can't argue winning records this year because neither of them have one, and don't tell me about what Moore did last year playing in relief, it's irrelevant at this point.

You also have to factor in that Clausen is a rookie and Moore is a 4 year vet and has had the benefit of being in this offense and throwing to many of these same players for much longer than Clausen.

Clausen may not be moving the offense very well, but Moore is a liability. I'll take the guy who doesn't turn the ball over 1 out of every 10 passing attempts and focus on my running game and my defense to win.

/thread


This discussion is ridiculous and will likely go on for 200 more posts as you don't give up even though none of these discussions change anyone's mind nor do they prove your point. What is also ridiculous is that you suggest Clausen has outplayed anyone when he has 3 Ints and 1 TD in 3 games. Using your criiteria Edwards has outplayed all of them since he hasn't throws any picks. Forget that he hasn't thrown any passes either. Of the 3 quarterbacks yo mentioned the only one who hasn't won a game in the NFl is your favorite Clausen. He couldn't score points for us if the other defense went into the locker room early.

Everyoe needs to get behid who they want but I still would rather have guys out there who have proven themselves to rookies that don't have a clue. But then again I am the same guy who said getting rid of the veterans would bite us in the butt and that we would be pretty bad this year. We all see who was right about that. So mark something else down, Moore if he starts the next 2 weeks will play better and help us win at least 1 of them versus Clausen who will lose them both. No matter how many picks get thrown.

That's it, I am done with this thread.

#176 Third Degree

Third Degree

    Come back soon, 89

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,535 posts
  • Location704

Posted 12 October 2010 - 09:56 AM

This discussion is ridiculous and will likely go on for 200 more posts as you don't give up even though none of these discussions change anyone's mind nor do they prove your point. What is also ridiculous is that you suggest Clausen has outplayed anyone when he has 3 Ints and 1 TD in 3 games. Using your criiteria Edwards has outplayed all of them since he hasn't throws any picks. Forget that he hasn't thrown any passes either. Of the 3 quarterbacks yo mentioned the only one who hasn't won a game in the NFl is your favorite Clausen. He couldn't score points for us if the other defense went into the locker room early.

Everyoe needs to get behid who they want but I still would rather have guys out there who have proven themselves to rookies that don't have a clue. But then again I am the same guy who said getting rid of the veterans would bite us in the butt and that we would be pretty bad this year. We all see who was right about that. So mark something else down, Moore if he starts the next 2 weeks will play better and help us win at least 1 of them versus Clausen who will lose them both. No matter how many picks get thrown.

That's it, I am done with this thread.


It's fans like these who predict the future with Moore's "knight in shining armor" supposed success, like the Edwards slurpers, who make me not want to post in the Huddle anymore.

#177 Cat'sGrowl

Cat'sGrowl

    The Beast Lurks Once More

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,113 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 09:56 AM

I knew if I walked into this thread I'd found p55 whining about his male gay lover not being on the field.
What do I win?

#178 Cat'sGrowl

Cat'sGrowl

    The Beast Lurks Once More

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,113 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 09:58 AM

Everyoe needs to get behid who they want but I still would rather have guys out there who have proven themselves to rookies that don't have a clue. But then again I am the same guy who said getting rid of the veterans would bite us in the butt and that we would be pretty bad this year. We all see who was right about that. So mark something else down, Moore if he starts the next 2 weeks will play better and help us win at least 1 of them versus Clausen who will lose them both. No matter how many picks get thrown.

That's it, I am done with this thread.


:lol:
Look kiddies, Moore is a "proven" QB.
He's proven one thing, that's for sure.
He sure can throw into triple coverage with the best of them.

#179 CatMan72

CatMan72

    KEEP POUNDING

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,911 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 10:02 AM

What have we learned in this process? P55 = Moore homer, but I already knew that so why am I suprised? LOL

#180 CatMan72

CatMan72

    KEEP POUNDING

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,911 posts

Posted 12 October 2010 - 10:03 AM

:lol:
Look kiddies, Moore is a "proven" QB.
He's proven one thing, that's for sure.
He sure can throw into triple coverage with the best of them.


Yup, he's made quite a statment by throwing a pick 1 out of every 10 attempts so far this year...

Matt Moore = Derek Anderson minus a pro-bowl appearance. They made him the starter and he had a brain cramp, nothing to see here - happens all the time.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.