All Activity

Or maybe, just Maybe, hear me out on this... Maybe it isn't "a problem" at all. Perhaps it's just a different way of thinking, one that I'd point out is equally valid and for which I can make a solid, logical argument. Does that seem too farfetched?

Well, i don't know. Maybe that's it If You were to ask me though (and just to be certain, I did) I tend to think it's more about this: Perhaps you can explain to me why this is Am I not allowed to come to the same conclusions about Bryce as you have unless I use the same criteria to do so? Does that really make sense? Is it really that important to you guys that I embrace the supremacy of stats, or can I continue to use my own reasoning? (that's what I'm gonna do either way of course, but I'll give you a chance to plead your case)

Just watched CBS's picks for the week and both of them are picking N.O. Prisco always goes against the Panthers so that's no surprise. Bilboard Material

Everything has limitations. But because you don't see them offer enough to put merit into them, you don't bother. That doesn't sound like a stats problem.

Weird, but I could've sworn there was more to an offense than just skill players Did the league change to a 7 on 7 format while i wasn't looking? Also weird that i could have sworn i actually changed my mind on Fitterer deserving more time after the stuff about him backstabbing Reich came out, but maybe you remember my memories better than I do That or maybe you're just looking to try and distract from the weakness of your arguments again. (I wonder which it is)

BYU? Hell, they have at least as strong of an argument as ND for being snubbed from the playoffs. Why didn't they take their ball and go stomping home? What are they doing playing?

Seahawks flying west coast to east coast and playing @1PM eastern is an advantage for us

So are you. ... Seriously though, I don't suggest teams or fans utterly ignore stats, but I do think it's extremely important to understand their limitations. For me, I rarely see them offer enough info to merit putting a high priority on them. Enough so that i don't even bother anymore. (ditto league rankings, who gives a sh-t) It's funny because outside of football I'm a huge math nerd who runs everything on spreadsheets Not football though. And that'll never change.

Another thread for you to argue about one player being better than another despite being inferior in every measurable metric because that's your opinion and your opinion is irrefutable? I mean... okay. LOL

That's where you and I disagree - and that's OK.

I mean your posts are there for everyone to read on the Saints having better skill players in the backfield than us. I mean, yeah, I can’t win an argument vs someone that thinks that and now think they didn’t argue such lol I’ll back away (better word usage) and you still don’t think you lost the Fitterer argument lol. So yeah, no one can beat you

What's obsessive is that he looks at a QB who is, objectively, performing worse by most meaningful metrics and is convinced he is playing better, solely because he has 8 more passing yards per game (despite a 2-4 record and a 1:1 turnover/TD ratio).

I don't buy into PFF either. And I'd credit this year's upswing to guys like Brandt Tilis way more than i would low level staffers from PFF. Fitterer was a big analytics guy (or at least became one when he got hired on here). Morgan prefers old school eyeball scouting. It's very possible that the more guys Morgan brings in to replace old hires, the better we could become.

I'm all with speaking it into existence. I believe.

Well, given that you can't seem to actually win an argument without resorting to misrepresentation of your opponent's position (like you're doing here) I can't say I blame you for backing down

Stats are a tool. It's how you use the tool that makes all the difference. You can choose to use them to help you identify trends or look for patterns. Or you can be ignorant and just try to use them universally. Stats aren't foolproof but neither are your eyes. If you use them together, stats can help verify what you think you're seeing or maybe they can disprove it as well. There's more than 1 way to cut a watermelon.

Now no matter what happens from this point forward if we don't win the division, the fault is solely yours. Congratulations and good luck.

PFF would disagree with that as would the 32 teams that utilize them. I would also like to add that I can't help but wonder if part of the FOs' success with FA and the draft this year can't be attributed to the recently guys hired from PFF.

Or undercredit him... See, here's the thing... Bryce isn't good enough. He doesn't have to be the worst in the league or in history or even this season to not be good enough. He just has to be, right now...not good enough. Yet somehow, it isn't enough to just say that. When someone saya he's not good enough but dismisses the hyperbole, your response is to devote significant effort to basically argue "Nuh uh! He is so the worst ever! And if you don't believe that well then you're just a Bryce atan engaging in Brycemania!" This is what For Jimmy was calling out, and he's right. It's like trying to debate complicated philosophy with an emotional child And yes, it's obsessive behavior.

You argued today the Saints backfield is better than the Panthers. I think I’m good and don’t need any more new debates for today

I'd disagree about the LAR game being stellar. He made a couple of key 4th down throws for touchdown, good throws and I give him credit for those, and a throw to Coker to seal the game but I wouldn't consider that a stellar game. The screen pass to Chubba was a standard screen pass. We had to have 2 4th down risky calls because the rest of the offense wasn't working. We were not moving the ball at will. Without a pick in the end zone and one returned for a TD, that 10 -14 point swing, we don't win that game. Bryce did not own that game. He had 3 great throws in that game, but that was really it. He did not dominate that game, at least from my point of view. 9 times out of 10, we don't win that game. Without those 3 takeaways, we don't win that game. The Dallas game, he had 200 yards passing and 3/1, but again, I wouldn't consider that stellar. What Rico did was stellar. I would consider what Bryce did a good game for a starting NFL QB. That's what those stat lines reflect and what he did in game. Did he make some big throws. Yes. But again. He didn't own that game. Rico owned that game. Maybe that's a stellar game for Bryce. I consider it a good game for a franchise QB. I expect 8 of those performances a year. Atlanta 2.0 was a stellar game. He did get a lot of help from his receivers with YAC but he was throwing it everywhere and he owned the field. That game he looked like a franchise QB. It's all in how you look at it I guess. The bar has been so low that a good game for a starting NFL QB can be considered stellar for Bryce. I want and expect more from a starting NFL QB, especially one that's going to be coming off his rookie contract and won't be able to have all the resources spent to surround him just to have this level of performance. If Bryce was a 5th round QB and not a 1st we wouldn't be having this discussion and therein lies the real issue I think. We're so heavily invested it's distorted our perception. If Bryce was playing for any other team we line up against on Sunday we'd be salivating.

Wrong again. It's not about Bryce at all Here's a key paragraph... Bryce is mentioned here, but only because he's the current big topic of conversation. I could leave his name out or replace it with anyone else's and the point would remain the same. So no, it isn't about Bryce. It's about stat based analysis in general. Now, you could conceivably attempt to debate against the actual thrust of the argument, but i doubt you will. Maybe that's because it's easier to sneak and make excuses, or maybe it's because you can't. The result is the same either way though

Baseball is waaaayy better suited to statistical analysis than football. If a hitter hits a home run, it's pretty much his own effort though the point goes to the team as a whole. For a team to score a touchdown (let's say via pass) the center has to make a good snap, he and the rest of the line have to block well enough to keep the defense from getting to the quarterback, the quarterback has to throw a good pass, the receiver has to run the correct route and catch the ball, the other potential targets have to effectively play their roles, and so on and so on and so on... Any single one of those things going wrong can short circuit the whole thing, and even if it's all done right the defense might still stop it. Individual stats just don't paint a complete picture. There are too many variables. To get an accurate picture that way requires looking at things from several different angles, something most folks are either ill equipped or unwilling to do. I don't bother with all that. I just watch the game and go by what I know.

Bryce logic is just The Golden Calf of Bristol logic boss. It’s the same Skip Bayless argument doesn’t matter he isn’t very good. Doesn’t matter he is why they are so often down. Doesn’t matter he doesn’t really generate offense. We got some really odd ball wins and there are some are some random late plays…it’s just a repackaged Tebowmania argument. But more bland. It’s a run game and D carrying the QB…..and wanting to over credit the QB