Once upon a time, Phans watched a game on Sunday afternoon, were happy or sad with the result, remembered the good and bad highlights, and waited for the Monday newspaper to see a few stats. Then, there was discussion/debate with friends on who played well and who did not. The stats were used, to a degree, in order to make a point. Nowadays, the flood gates have opened with more stats than anyone knows what to do with. I can now click a button to find out how a QB has done in everything. Overall rating, pass rating, run rating, penalties, drop backs, runs, atts, comp, &, throw aways, hits, batted passes, spikes, yards, yds per att, tds, ints, sacks, drops, passes by direction, passes by distance, passes under pressure, who caught what, and who was in coverage. I can go on but, everyone gets the idea. I now watch a game the first time for the agony or extasy of the outcome. Then a second or third time to see how players played. I click on stats to see more of what was done. I click on stats to cover my *** on coming debates, within the next hour after the game, from Phans and opposing fans. I click on stats to back up opinions for this and forum posts. Stats are running wild. Are you enjoying the game more with, or without stats? Which one's really matter? And, how much do you love or hate them?
It was a helluva lot easier to enjoy without stats. It used to be as simple as your team won or your team lost. It was much easier then. Too much analyzing and OVER-analyzing these days. Still, it's hard to NOT get caught up in it. But it was much funner when you didn't think about anything but wins/losses and playoffs/no playoffs. That's ultimately all that matters anyway. Because winning or losing is what it comes down to. I have to say that, although I find myself getting sucked in by the stats as well, all I care about is if my team wins or loses. Doesn't matter if offense, defense, or special teams won it for us on that particular Sunday.
Everyone likes stats that agree with them. When it doesn't, it's called stat monkeying and the stats have been "raped". It's disgusting really. I re-watch the games, then look behind the stats as to why they say what they say. You just can't look at a play and say that guy sucked. You need to look at the play call vs. the defense. You can't just look at the stats and say that guy sucked. You have to have the context of the plays in the game. Some people watch the game in the heat of emotions and think they're more valid than you because of some arbitrary feeling of superiority. Some guys re-watch and come to other conclusions but others just speak in platitudes and predictions and call you a homer. Just get me 16 CC's of Dolphin football stat.
I think it depends on planetary alignment, or phases of the moon, as for how much he loves them at any particular moment. Sometimes the attraction to stats is very powerful, they are quoted and referred to...then other times any reference to stats is disregarded with a "bah, stat monkeys" type of comment. LMAO.
"Only 5 of 6 of the last 10 SB winning teams have had a QBR of..." Bleech, stats have their place, in usage for comparisons between two players, however unlike MLB (which I think the current use of stats comes from, lots of in the box thinkers in the NFL media) football is a physical game first and foremost, a Cb can have no int's for a season and stats wise...oohh...he's bad...the way the game is played he simply was not thrown at very often. Stats are also useful for detecting actionable trends, and on the alternative, opportunities, for all of the huffing and puffing about a "franchise qb" the opposite is also true, the door is wide open for a dominant Feature Back to emerge, when everyone is buying, you sell, when everyone is selling, you buy, running backs have been so devalued that, to me, that is where opportunity lays for improvement. Sparano referenced Henne's stats to justify Henne's 2010 season, said "they were comparable to the top guys" the reality is, in the 4th Qtr when stats typically matter, Henne was really poor, so what are you going to believe, your lying eyes, or stats?
Well here is a good example: Which Cornerback had 59 tackles and 6 int's in 2010? Which cornerback had 32 tackles and -0- int's in 2010?
Stats wise though, he isn't, in fact one could make a credible argument that SS24 played as well as Revis. We see dropped int's opposing offenses saw someone they should avoid throwing the ball towards their side of the field. Another example, Randy Starks say, had a down yr, stats wise he had a 92% stop rate, one of the best in the NFL (he was a UDFA btw), and yet just on surface stats most dolfans think he had a down season. Now I watched the man play all season, and thought he did not look as explosive as he had looked in 09, stats say otherwise, who ya gonna believe, stats, or your lying eyes?
