Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Zod

Correct me if I am wrong...

109 posts in this topic

Recent stats probably will show that you don't have to be top ten in just ONE category, but rather at least in the top half of the league at both running the ball and passing the ball on offense and likewise good at stoping both on defense, good at special teams, and have a low turnover ratio.

Therefore one can surmise that you would need both a good QB AND a good running game on offense. Since we have a good running game, it just makes sense to get a QB who can actually throw the ball farther than three yards like Clausen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thats one year. give me stats for the last 5 years and then we can agree on something.

:D just trying to make u do more work.

Me?

I don't mind doing the work but like I've said before I'm not a big fan of stats because they don't show the whole picture, like SF and Houston having top 10 run defenses but in reality it's only because they can't stop the pass. Intelligent people know which teams can run and stop the run. I only posted the stats because other people live and die by them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1215099566335.jpg.%5Broflposters.com%5D.myspace.jpg

So if someone is speaking negatively about Luck they have to be trolling? Why? Id it because he is the second Peyton Manning? Zod brings up very good points. I think alot of people need to step back and stop slurping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only thing is, this happens every year. Its not the first and won't be the last. What if we draft him and he busts? What if we don't draft him, and we miss out? What if we draft him, and he does well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know where you got your numbers but they are wrong.

Again, I'm not saying you have to be top 12 in both categories to make the playoffs but the really good teams are good at both of those things (with few exceptions).

You just pointed out that 50% of the teams are in the playoffs with top 10 run games and 80% are in contention. You also pointed out 50% of teams have clinched in the top 10 at run stopping and 60% are in contention (in reality SF and Houston shouldn't count because they only have good numbers due to terrible pass defenses 24 and 32 respectively).

For comparision, top 10 passing offenses:

1. Indy - In contention

2. NO - Clinched

3. SD - Eliminated

4. Dallas - Eliminated

5 GB - In contention

6. Houston - Eliminated

7. Denver - Eliminated

8. Philly - Clinched

9. NYG - In contention

10. Wash - Eliminated

Only 20% of the top 10 has clinched and only 50% is in contention.

What would you take, 50% clinched and 80% contention or 20% clinched and 50% contention?

I got my numbers from NFL.com. I clicked on "stats" and sorted by team total rushing yards. That doesn't include the Philadelphia/Minnesota game, but that will just further my point. Minnesota is sitting 85 yards behind Atlanta for #10 in rushing offense. Neither team should fall out in rush defense.

And why shouldn't SF and Houston not count just because they can't stop the pass? SF is #2 in yards per attempt and Houston is #7. You don't get to cherry pick stats just because they don't fit your argument.

And you totally missed my point about the QBs. Like I said, they may not put up numbers but they know how to not screw up. Guys like Kyle Orton can put up numbers but no one will ever accuse him of being a good QB.

Recent stats probably will show that you don't have to be top ten in just ONE category, but rather at least in the top half of the league at both running the ball and passing the ball on offense and likewise good at stoping both on defense, good at special teams, and have a low turnover ratio.

Therefore one can surmise that you would need both a good QB AND a good running game on offense. Since we have a good running game, it just makes sense to get a QB who can actually throw the ball farther than three yards like Clausen.

But I think you hit the nail on the head here.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if Luck stinks it up January 3rd and Newton destroys Oregon January 10th, do the Huddle servers explode?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got my numbers from NFL.com. I clicked on "stats" and sorted by team total rushing yards. That doesn't include the Philadelphia/Minnesota game, but that will just further my point. Minnesota is sitting 85 yards behind Atlanta for #10 in rushing offense. Neither team should fall out in rush defense.

And why shouldn't SF and Houston not count just because they can't stop the pass? SF is #2 in yards per attempt and Houston is #7. You don't get to cherry pick stats just because they don't fit your argument.

And you totally missed my point about the QBs. Like I said, they may not put up numbers but they know how to not screw up. Guys like Kyle Orton can put up numbers but no one will ever accuse him of being a good QB.

But I think you hit the nail on the head here.

I said if you looked closely at SF and Hou you would see why they are in there, not that they don't count, which is why I left them in there when calculating my percentages.

But you didn't answer my one question for you (probably because the answer didn't fit my argument)

What would you take, 50% clinched and 80% contention or 20% clinched and 50% contention?

Again, if this is a passing league and it's all about QBs and all the rule changes favor passing the ball and running the ball is dead and blah blah blah...

What would you choose? What odds would you take if you were building a playoff team year in and year out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said if you looked closely at SF and Hou you would see why they are in there, not that they don't count, which is why I left them in there when calculating my percentages.

But you didn't answer my one question for you (probably because the answer didn't fit my argument)

Again, if this is a passing league and it's all about QBs and all the rule changes favor passing the ball and running the ball is dead and blah blah blah...

What would you choose? What odds would you take if you were building a playoff team year in and year out?

That's the 2nd time you missed the point. It's not about accumulating stats considering the fact that Kyle Orton of all people is up there in YPG. It's about those guys I named being good QBs, winning games and giving their teams the best chance to win.

In any case, I never ever said running the ball is dead. In fact:

Yeah, you need to be able to run the ball but most of these teams don't have an elite runner, but they almost all have top QBs.

That was my point. Not that passing is more important than rushing or anything like that. You're just putting way too much stock into a correlation that doesn't exist between running the ball well and success. The key to winning, now, is having a good QB. He doesn't have to put up mindblowing stats, because that's not the be all end all of being a good QB, but he can't just be a "game manager" anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if Luck stinks it up January 3rd and Newton destroys Oregon January 10th, do the Huddle servers explode?

No, Zod will create a Cam Newton News and Updates thread stickied

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think the stats of running vs passing might be off base some. I'm willing to bet those near the top in 3rd down conversions and stops are in the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was my point. Not that passing is more important than rushing or anything like that. You're just putting way too much stock into a correlation that doesn't exist between running the ball well and success. The key to winning, now, is having a good QB. He doesn't have to put up mindblowing stats, because that's not the be all end all of being a good QB, but he can't just be a "game manager" anymore.

I think you have your words mixed up. There is most definitely a correlation. I think what you meant was that correlation does not mean causation.

So you must have a good QB. This QB doesn't need to put up mind blowing stats he just can't make mistakes (sounds like game manager). Then you say he can't be a game manager.

I think you are running yourself in a circle because your point makes as much since as the statement that Jimmy Clausen was the most NFL ready college QB (both brought to you by ESPN and both false).

You list the QBs and say the RBs aren't elite but it's only to the casual fans that know QBs and not RBs. It's only casual fans that can't differentiate stats between when a QB has a good run game and when he doesn't. You see Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco as elite QBs. I see them as game managers that have the benefit of run games and defenses. You see Big Ben as elite but they went 3-1 without him on the strength of their run game and defense. I can go on about this but the fact is you won't see it because ESPN already told you it's a QB league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites