November 18th, 2011, 00:51
Posts: 1,160
Threads: 3
Joined: Jan 2010
Cyneheard Wrote:Yeah, that was nuts. And good for 8 more points at the end, for 16 for Sunrise. Tebow makes it work somehow. I wish I knew how.
In other news, the only "player" worth playing was the Broncos D (Jets D was mediocre, they just couldn't get anything beyond a McGahee fumble).
Glad I didn't trust McGahee this week...Jesus. -1???
Yeah... who would think that the only player worth anything would be the Broncos D?
In other news... Tebow is sub-50% again, the team has a rough first 3 quarters, and then pulls off another game winning drive after the 2 minute warning. 4 wins in 5 games. I haven't been able to watch a Tebow game yet... but is he really as bad as the media makes him out to be? We could pull a lot of stats to make him look bad... or one important stat: first 3 game win streak since that sloppy Monday night win against the Chargers in October '09.
So... to those of you that have really watched him play... which is the real slim shady?
You can get a look at a t-bone by looking up the bulls ass but I'd rather take the butcher's word for it.
November 18th, 2011, 01:25
Posts: 8,022
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2006
Mr. Nice Guy Wrote:Yeah... who would think that the only player worth anything would be the Broncos D?
In other news... Tebow is sub-50% again, the team has a rough first 3 quarters, and then pulls off another game winning drive after the 2 minute warning. 4 wins in 5 games. I haven't been able to watch a Tebow game yet... but is he really as bad as the media makes him out to be? We could pull a lot of stats to make him look bad... or one important stat: first 3 game win streak since that sloppy Monday night win against the Chargers in October '09.
So... to those of you that have really watched him play... which is the real slim shady?
IMO, he's terrible and I don't believe for one second in the cliche of players "knowing how to win." But I might be biased because I have been a Tebow hater for a long time. 
I've got some dirt on my shoulder, can you brush it off for me?
November 18th, 2011, 01:31
Posts: 6,487
Threads: 63
Joined: Sep 2006
I don't think he's as bad as the statline suggests, but then who is? Purple Drank? 
Just guessing, but considering he seems about league accurate on the deep ball (I know, small sample size, but so is 4-1 as a starter and yet that's why we're having the conversation) I think some of this is over-compensation for giving up so many sacks earlier in the season. Say he's still not comfortable at the NFL level and so his limited time post-snap is mainly looking to avoid sacks and make good reads (only 1 pick so far), and he doesn't have the time left to get in position to make an accurate short/medium throw. Evidence I see of this is just how bad he can be scrambling and throwing, especially to his right.
Of course it could be simply good luck to not have a half dozen more picks, but if we're going to argue regression to the mean I'd suggest maybe his completion percentage will do the same thing (it was ~65% in college).
I also am no football expert, but I wonder why they even bother with 20 pass attempts when some of them are screens and other short stuff. When I see a QB with EIGHT-POINT-FOUR yards per carry I think I'm not running him enough. Screens counter blitzes, but so do two things Tebow seems good at: a) running around the outside rusher untouched (or just smashing a safety or corner to the ground) or b) throwing to the guy deep who is in single coverage or wide open. For all the talk of the "college offense" Denver is running I don't know why we can't go run-run-run-deep pass like the old NFL but just out of the shotgun. Let the runs be a mixture of option plays and designed runs, but work that 8.4 YPC!
PS - Gem of the game:
*[late in the 4th, Jets finish a down via completion in bounds, spike ball]
*Color Commentator: "I think that's a huge mistake, I don't know why they didn't burn their timeout the second the play ended"
*[Jets are and have been out of time outs]
*Play by play guy: "Um...and so...here we go with fourth down."
*[Thinks "yep, I was slick, no one even noticed that!"]
EDIT: I've asked via a comment over at AdvancedNFLStats whether there's any way to tell if a QB is elevating his team to play better. One way is looking at a team with more wins than QB play, in expected point terms, would suggest. But with 32 teams we'll always see that, like the Falcons last year. I do think there may be something to it in isolated cases though. I normally HATE platitudes like "will to win" and "clutch play," but I also recognize this is a team that won 8 games in 2009 and 4 in 2010 and that has been gutted of talent. Of course I also went to Florida, so it's really hard to control the bias...
November 18th, 2011, 03:51
Posts: 8,022
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2006
sunrise089 Wrote:*[late in the 4th, Jets finish a down via completion in bounds, spike ball]
*Color Commentator: "I think that's a huge mistake, I don't know why they didn't burn their timeout the second the play ended"
*[Jets are and have been out of time outs]
*Play by play guy: "Um...and so...here we go with fourth down."
*[Thinks "yep, I was slick, no one even noticed that!"]
This happens all the time, and in all sports really, though football seems to be especially prone to the commentators not only not understanding the sport they're covering on a macro level (that's pretty much true of all sports on tv) but also not having any actual awareness of the game they are watching. I mean, how many places in their field of vision are the # of timeouts remaining shown? Not to mention in general each timeout taken is to some degree an event, so its fairly easy to remember their usage. And still not mentioning they have an earbud feeding them whatever stat they need. But it really is uncanny considering they're being paid to watch the game.
As far as knowing how to win, etc, is concerned - in general football defies statistical truisms because a 16-game season is too small a sample size to tell us much of anything. Do I believe that certain quarterbacks have better leadership qualities than others? Sure. Do I think this matters in whether they're successful or not? Sure. But I don't think anyone can win in this league longterm with that sort of accuracy on short-to-medium passes. As a Bills fan I went through this a little bit with the Flutie/Rob Johnson era. I was a Johnson guy because I tend to believe in tangible things like arm strength, etc. But there's no question Flutie was more successful and at least part of that is probably attributable to the fact that Rob Johnson is not the sort of guy you "run through a wall" for. Flutie, of course, was an infinitely better passer than Tebow is at this point, but he'd also been a professional for 10-12 years at that point. Regardless, he wasn't going to win any Super Bowls either, and that was a pretty good team - particularly on defense at that point.
Anyway, its fun to see it while it lasts, even if I don't like the guy. I like the idea of a throwback offense - there's enough spread in this league. Its pretty amazing they're winning games with that team, however they're managing to do it.
I've got some dirt on my shoulder, can you brush it off for me?
November 18th, 2011, 07:32
Posts: 3,924
Threads: 19
Joined: May 2011
Mr. Nice Guy Wrote:Yeah... who would think that the only player worth anything would be the Broncos D?
In other news... Tebow is sub-50% again, the team has a rough first 3 quarters, and then pulls off another game winning drive after the 2 minute warning. 4 wins in 5 games. I haven't been able to watch a Tebow game yet... but is he really as bad as the media makes him out to be? We could pull a lot of stats to make him look bad... or one important stat: first 3 game win streak since that sloppy Monday night win against the Chargers in October '09.
So... to those of you that have really watched him play... which is the real slim shady?
He's a young, learning QB who looks to possibly be a game manager-type with added running ability. I saw some horrid passes, but I also saw some neat, tight spirals and there were about 3-4 easy passes in the 3rd that Broncos' wideouts just dropped. I think he's no lock and I don't think he will ever be OMGWTFBBQ, but I think for the fact he's a second year QB it's fine.
I say, at the least, give him the same amount of games JaWalrus got. That's 25 games Tebow can start and then you can evaulate how he is progressing so far.
(In FF news, more trade proposals going here and there and other places too).
I'm suprised to see anyone who went for Rob Johnson over Doug Flutie. You don't switch a QB who has led your team to 10-5 after the final game of the season heading into the playoffs and yes I know they lost because of the Music City Miracle, but it's just plain a bad descision, barring super circumstances like Tom Brady or Peyton Manning or Joe Montana or something.
If you ask me, the most important thing for a QB isn't heart(though that's nessecary in the end, but that's true for most any good QB) or arm strength. It's, to paraphrase a baseball player in Greg Maddux, "that thing between both of your ears we call a brain."
Also, I thought the announcer thing was just a display issue: IIRC, the score ticker thing they had also displayed the Jets with timeouts at that point.
November 18th, 2011, 23:14
Posts: 8,022
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2006
Kuro Wrote:I'm suprised to see anyone who went for Rob Johnson over Doug Flutie. You don't switch a QB who has led your team to 10-5 after the final game of the season heading into the playoffs and yes I know they lost because of the Music City Miracle, but it's just plain a bad descision, barring super circumstances like Tom Brady or Peyton Manning or Joe Montana or something.
1. It wasn't so much that I wanted him for that playoff game as much as I wanted him in general.
2. Led the team to 10-5 is an overstatement. That was a good football team, they nearly beat the eventual AFC champion on the road with Rob Johnson at QB. I felt at the time if they had won that game they'd have gone to the Super Bowl (and lost to the Rams.) Wade Phillips can coach defense.
3. Never mention "Forward Lateral" to me again. Coming on the heels of "No Goal," it was a rough time to be a Buffalo sports fan. Of course, every time is a rough time to be a Buffalo sports fan. Coincidentally, this is around the same time period I started to really get into soccer.
I've got some dirt on my shoulder, can you brush it off for me?
November 20th, 2011, 16:28
Posts: 5,641
Threads: 30
Joined: Apr 2009
Did anyone see the GB game? Jennings only getting 2 catches for 6 yards is not him at all.
And it looks like I'm screwed. Fred Jackson has not been himself for several weeks now.
November 21st, 2011, 07:24
Posts: 4,138
Threads: 54
Joined: Dec 2009
Got some close games going here
"You want to take my city of Troll%ng? Go ahead and try."
November 21st, 2011, 11:48
Posts: 6,487
Threads: 63
Joined: Sep 2006
Is there some way to see where point reductions came from?
November 21st, 2011, 12:11
Posts: 3,924
Threads: 19
Joined: May 2011
Damian Williams manages to only get one point on eleven targets.
Dammit, Williams!
And who would have guessed that Cedric Benson would get 16 FF points against the Ravens D? Not me.
On the plus side, I can win with 3 TDs or so when yardage is factored in, and it's the Patriots against the Chiefs D...I have an outside shot at this.
|
