All Activity

Are you suggesting garbage time stats aren't equally valid?

Didn’t do it every time for Bryce’s Didn’t do it every time with PJ Walker. But pending the convo, sometimes it was warranted in certain convos and discussions. I would assume the Panthers aren’t spending lots of time on the 2 games he game in during the 4th and 3rd q during film study and are spending most of their time studying the games he started in.

me-

As substantive and well thought out a response as I've come to expect (Note: This is sarcasm)

Sincerely, The Bryce reality checkers (who don’t go around making a billion new Bryce threads)

Take care of business this week and I am all in.

"There's three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli Some years back, a rather dimwitted Steeler fan tried to trash talk me with the following quote: "Kordell set a record on your field with a bunch of backups. I wish we could play the Panthers every week" (Side Note: If you remember seeing Panthers mascot Sir Purr dive on a live ball, this was the game where that happened. As I recall, that incident resulted in his "coordinator" having to seek other employment) A legitimate record was indeed set that day when Stewart ran for an 80 yard touchdown from scrimmage (at the time, the longest rushing touchdown ever by a quarterback). The "bunch of backups" line was also true because the Steelers came into the game already banged up and lost additional players to injury during the first half. So yes, what he said was technically true. Even so, I still remember the exact quote primarily because it was such a hilariously awful take "Numbers don't lie, but liars use numbers." - Anonymous Why? Well because what was omitted from this… dazzlingly brilliant analysis… was the fact that Stewart ended the contest by throwing a game losing interception to Chad Cota in the end zone. It was his second pick of the day, but undoubtedly the more devastating of the two. Trash talking after a loss isn't all that bright to begin with, but even worse when you lose like that. Hence, my response to his pitiful attempt at flexing: "Well if you did (play us every week), you'd be 0-16" Obviously that's a story from pretty long ago (almost thirty years) but I think of that guy every time somebody comes at me with this sort of argument… "But...stats" "Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable." - Mark Twain Of late, I'm seeing a lot of folks argue about and against Bryce Young based on stats. It's funny, because at no point have I suggested that Bryce is or should be our franchise guy, but my reasoning behind that isn't based in statistics. Apparently, it's not enough for some folks that you come to the same conclusion. You also have to get there via the same path I've said a number of times that football is far too complicated a game to count on pure stats as a primary analytical tool. Posted some examples of why earlier that I'll repeat here in a format of statements vs rebuttal questions. Starting with... Statement: Quarterback X has lousy completion percentage. Question: Okay, but how good are his receivers? Statement: Quarterback X hasn’t thrown for more than 200 yards in a single game this year. Question: Does his team have a run heavy scheme or a phenomenally effective run game? Statement: Quarterback X has thrown for 3000 yards this season. Question: How many of those yards came after the catch? Statement: Quarterback X didn't throw a pass further than ten yards last game. Question: But did he put the ball in good spots for his receivers to catch it and run for good gains? And so on... Truth be told, there are lots more scenarios you could throw in here, but the underlying point is that simple stat lines don’t paint a complete picture. One of the better illustrations of that being the stat line Jerome Bettis once put up in a playoff game: 5 carries, -1 yard, 3 touchdowns "He understood that three bad shots could be overcome by one...phenomenal one." - The Legend of Bagger Vance The team dependent aspect of the game isn't the only pitfall to stat-driven analysis though. There's also a game dependent aspect. Specifically, timing. Sometimes it's not just about what happened but when it happened. The Stewart story is a good illustration. Had he thrown a pick earlier in the game it certainly would have been bad, but doing it on what turned out to be the final play of the game made it devastating. If you were to look back at the game stats without understanding the context of that play, you won’t understand the full impact. The above quote above from fictional golf guru Bagger Vance points out something similar. In football, you can have a lousy performance on offense (or a strong performance on defense) get totally turned around on you because of a single big play. It's not at all unusual for a great statistical performance to be part of a loss that happened because somebody choked at a crucial moment. Likewise, there are numerous games every year where the stats might look like bat sh-t but you still come away with a win. We call it "winning ugly" but it's still winning. And I'm pretty sure the vast majority of us will take a butt ugly win over even the most aesthetically pleasing loss. "So I'm ugly. So what? I never saw anyone hit with his face." - Yogi Berra Hell, Barry Sanders made a career out of that sort of oddball principle. He's almost universally recognized as one of the best runningbacks in NFL history, yet there were games where he might be tackled behind the line of scrimmage multiple times (lousy blocking) only to turn around and break off a run of 60, 70, 80 yards or more on a single play. Still, nobody would be silly enough to use those plays as an argument to downgrade Sanders’ obvious greatness. Would they? Well yeah, they would. In fact, I've heard more than one person suggest that this was a knock on him; typically within the context of trying to argue that other backs were better. Again though, this ignores context because Sanders never exactly had a great offensive line blocking for him. But hey, that doesn't really matter. You know, because...stats. Right? "Statistics are no substitute for judgment." - Henry Clay One of the things that used to infuriate me most about the corporate world was that a fair number of supervisors and management types really had no clue how to accurately evaluate employee performance. And even a good number of those who did understand were too lazy to actually put forth the needed effort. So what did they rely on? I could repeat the word, but if I have to at this point, you're probably not paying attention. If there wasn't a chart or a spreadsheet to consult, they couldn't (or wouldn’t)- make their own judgments. The most common argument in favor of this approach tended to be that numbers were impartial. The more accurate take though is that without looking at the big picture, stats are incomplete. Sometimesitw a crutch for football fans too Bottom Line: If you genuinely think just looking at a stat line tells you enough to make a true and proper judgment, that’s your choice. If you really wanna try and persuade me of something though, my likely response will be to quote a former head coach of ours... "Stats are for losers." - John Fox

There was a brief time where many in the fanbase considered if we should seek his services after the dumpster fire that was the Matt Rhule experience had us completely downbad. Such is the result of living with the Tepper's as owners.

I know Herniay, gettlegut, shittererererrer, shinkshipsefort never took a awful OL or DL and solved the problems more than one year flukes. The depth is about as good as ever too, Cam Jackson and JHH have been inactive main stays. Panthers have been protecting them for a big portion of the season, cause Im sure some team would claim them. Sam Roberts was like the 10th DLmen and failcons signed him to their roster before week 1 and he's been there since. When teams are signing your 6th string player to a 53 roster, thats a great sign. Its against my rules to judge rookie class in their 1st season, but they've injected this team with talent and energy. 21% change with youth that by the early looks many have enough talent to help the team. Thor was getting starter snaps before his awful injury and he's not included. This group was under Dan and Tils watch, they had to add a 2nd rounder to counter that BY trade. Trade-wise they have been on the clear winning side on all 5-6 of them, the AT one looks arrestable right now. No one bats 1.000 on FA moves, they have bought something to roster. Turk had injuries and not playing at his salary-level, but he's stepping up with leadership and busting his arse in the weight room. Boom is leading too. Rico broke some all-time records and was lava hot leading the NFC in rushing without many snaps. Moehring has upped the talent level and able to play close to LOS while guarding TEs. They found Brycen Tremayne young perfect #4-5 WR that plays hard on STs. He a great blocker and I think he's can improve to a #3 type role given his young age and work ethic. He was the one that screwed up the WR numbers, no one had him making the team against 9 NFL WRs. The guy just busted his arse and made them roster him. Great under radar find, shame he's not gotten props. Early in the season he caught some big time balls too. I think for sure they have improved this team and done so with youth. If they get another 12 or so players like this 2025 class in 2026......That may build for the the first time, a team that can go to the playoff year after year.

If you actually edited those games out every time you mention his last season stats then more power to you. That's not the norm as most people just pull the stats from major sites like ESPN and NFL.com. Have fun looking at your posts for it. Maybe you will see how fixated you have become on a certain topic.

This is young’s time to shine Execute or take your seat at the kiddie table i can say this. The Bryce that comes out of the tunnel will tell the tale of this game and the season watch his face in warmups or on the first offensive series if he looks like he just turned off a video game in his pajamas leaving his momma’s basement, kinda deer in the headlights like the 49ers or sleepwalking like the first saints game, it is over if he looks focused and composed, a chance he can be very uneven

yeah, and in this case, people wanted to talk about a full time starter vs a guy that had garbage time games mixed in. I would wager a fun bet, I can find a post of mine, where I did that very thing for Bryce Young last year and edited those games out.

If I'm being honest, I still have no idea what to think of Bryce. And the uncertainty/divide in how to think of him only further shows why everyone is in a bit of a tough spot (fans, the team, heck, Bryce himself) He's had: 3 non-consecutive stellar games this year (DAL, LAR, ATL-2) - no disputing this 2 games where he initially looked terrible and then turned it around (AZ, MIA) - Both started so bad but he eventually came around. 6 where he was just really bad and difficult to watch. What we've been used to and was as recent as Thanksgiving on National TV. 1 where he didn't need to do much and we won handedly (ATL-1) - I think what a lot comes down to - Most fans REALLY don't like the fact that he has insurmountable physical limitations, so when he's bad, it feels like the pit of misery. Being stuck with a guy with no real elite physical traits where the team needs to be near perfect. It's just like "Ugh we're stuck with this shrimp dick?" He only very recently pulled together a game where he showed off franchise ability. I just need to see more. Nothing has come together but we've finally seen a flash. Took a while, but the Atlanta and Rams games were what I want to see. Hope it can continue. The duds just hit you like a frying pan to the head.

Exactly. Which means data.... doesn't always tell the whole story! Congrats we are officially fully circle again. Love talking in circles with you. Data without context is pointless. You can also skew it to tell whatever story you want, like looking at just games a player starts, GWDs, PFF etc...

Regardless most lists are not removing data from games players missed part of whether they got hurt or came off the bench. I don't think people are removing the game Bryce came off the bench when they are looking at this totals last year. It's typically cumulative.

I think without manipulating the data, Gunner is the GOAT

That's a fairly big loss, especially for squaring up against our interior. First things first, we better freaking beat the Saints

it's not so much my case, as IMO you suggest I am uniquely doing something here for Shough...... but how I simply have always talked about QBs. Specifically, ones that haven't started all season. I have done that with basically everyone for years. I mean, I guess my point is, you can disagree with caring about starts and think backup player garbage time games is just as important of data and shouldn't be separated. I'm just saying I'm not uniquely doing it for Shough. That's what I always do. I have done it with all the Panthers QBs over the years that weren't starters the full season.

What do you think that means?

It's pretty simple as they are very close. When you look at season totals Bryce barely beats him in a few stats. When you look at starts he barely beats Bryce. Most of the major sites have their data listed by season totals but you are looking at starts as it helps your case. That's all. Regardless they are playing close with Bo Nix right there as well.

That's what I'm talking about