Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Cam's second half improvement


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#16 iBBB

iBBB

    no more maybe next year.

  • ALL-PRO
  • 548 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 04:11 PM

That's not what he's saying at all. For the first have the season lets saying Rodgers has a 96.4 passer rating. Then the second half of the second he have a 96.8 passer rating. He's stayed the same. While Bradford can have 79.2 passer rating the first half and a 79.4 passer rating the last half they both with show as staying the same. He's not staying Bradford is on par with Rodgers just that the graph isn't showing the context of they've been throwing. So blanket statements like the ones in the middle are more consistent isn't completely true

 

it actually is true and you explained it yourself.

 

being consistent means staying at/around your average passer rating.

 

you can stay consistent at 20% or 120%, it means that your passer rating doesnt fluctuate throughout the season.

 

so in other words, bradford is consistent at sucking ass. 



#17 tiger7_88

tiger7_88

    old skool SWAG

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,894 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 04:21 PM

it's 2nd half of the season, not 2nd half of games.

 

So "crunch time" only applies to the second half of football games?

 

Period?

 

And never at any other time?

 

So winning 6 out of your last 8 games to ensure you make the playoffs isn't doing it at "crunch time"?



#18 nosuchthingasapanther

nosuchthingasapanther

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,441 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 04:31 PM

it actually is true and you explained it yourself.

 

being consistent means staying at/around your average passer rating.

 

you can stay consistent at 20% or 120%, it means that your passer rating doesnt fluctuate throughout the season.

 

so in other words, bradford is consistent at sucking ass. 

 

thank you for clearing this up.



#19 nickzz

nickzz

    o

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,884 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 05:02 PM

So "crunch time" only applies to the second half of football games?

 

Period?

 

And never at any other time?

 

So winning 6 out of your last 8 games to ensure you make the playoffs isn't doing it at "crunch time"?

 

i don't know. when people say crunch time i think the end of games.

 

as for the bolded statement, you were the one saying he wasn't performing during crunch time so i don't know why you're directing that towards me. i just clarified what the graph was illustrating.



#20 tiger7_88

tiger7_88

    old skool SWAG

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,894 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 06:44 PM

 

as for the bolded statement, you were the one saying he wasn't performing during crunch time so i don't know why you're directing that towards me. i just clarified what the graph was illustrating.

 

That's exactly what I was saying.

 

 Because Luck's performance was less-than-average in most of those games BUT HIS TEAM WAS WINNING ANYWAY.

 

Luck's worst performances of the year were in the 2nd half of the season in games they critically needed to win to get into the playoffs.



#21 CarolinaCoolin

CarolinaCoolin

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,482 posts
  • LocationMaryland

Posted 17 June 2013 - 07:08 PM

it actually is true and you explained it yourself.

being consistent means staying at/around your average passer rating.

you can stay consistent at 20% or 120%, it means that your passer rating doesnt fluctuate throughout the season.

so in other words, bradford is consistent at sucking ass.


Yeah you didn't listen either. Good job. I said not completely true. While its true they were consistent they weren't on the same level which what i was trying to tell the person I responded.

#22 SOJA

SOJA

    Official Panthers Fan

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,903 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 07:13 PM

You know who I am getting a little sick of getting a ton of attention: Ryan Tannehill- the guy hasn't proven anything, yet people are picking the Dolphins to win the division. Brady could pick three random huddlers  to be his starting wide-outs and still be a better QB than Tannehill next year. 



#23 Match.com

Match.com

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,394 posts
  • LocationPhiladelphia, PA

Posted 18 June 2013 - 10:01 AM

Nice graph bro!

#24 Match.com

Match.com

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,394 posts
  • LocationPhiladelphia, PA

Posted 18 June 2013 - 10:01 AM

That wasn't a joke....you did your research

#25 lovelett

lovelett

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 434 posts
  • LocationWest Palm Beach, Florida

Posted 18 June 2013 - 10:17 PM

[quote name="SOJA" post="2260125" timestamp="1371514380"]

You know who I am getting a little sick of getting a ton of attention: Ryan Tannehill- the guy hasn't proven anything, yet people are picking the Dolphins to win the division. Brady could pick three random huddlers to be his starting wide-outs and still be a better QB than Tannehill next year.

That is exactly what is happening down here in Florida, everyone thinks tannehill is going to dominate and Wallace is going to get 1500 yards. i hate the patriots as much as everyone else but tannehill was not even good last year and now they are going to beat the Pats?

#26 SIGCHI222

SIGCHI222

    the illustrious potentate

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,434 posts
  • LocationShelby

Posted 18 June 2013 - 10:37 PM

حسنا اللعنة لي الثابت واتصل بي سالي.

 




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com