For some reason I thought to myself, "I bet Cbrad is actually going to research this...even though it will take multiple searches and sometimes counting across multiple seasons." And at that point, I almost didn't post what I did. Then I thought, "Naw, he will probably just let that statistical challenge slide. Surely every head coach has lost 3 out of 4 at one point, even if it was with their starter and not identical to our situation." Sure enough though, there you went digging to prove me wrong. So grats to you, good sir, for continually raising expectations.
Well first of all, while OL has been a persistent concern, LB and our run defense was arguably the biggest concern from last season and that was upgraded. So while I agree on OL, I'd point out you can't do everything in one offseason. Now.. to the idea you need a HC with proven NFL experience that has had success in the NFL, here are some interesting stats on all SB winning HC's in the salary cap era (from 1994): 1) 9 coaches were 1st-time HC's (Seifert, Switzer, Holmgren, Billick, Cowher, Tomlin, Payton, McCarthy, Harbaugh) 2) 7 coaches were 2nd-time HC's (Shanahan, Vermeil, Gruden, Dungy, Coughlin, Kubiak, Belichick) 3) 1 coach was a 3rd-time HC (Carroll) 4) ALL 9 1st-time HC's had either a winning season their first season or at worst 8-8 5) 4 of 7 2nd-time HC's had losing records with their 1st team 6) Carroll (3rd-time HC) was 33-31 with his first 2 teams 7) 5 of 8 2nd- or 3rd-time HC's had a losing record their last season with their prior team. So consider that for a moment. First of all, there's no pattern here that suggests you should aim for a veteran HC. Second of all, Gase is following in the pattern of all 1st-time HC's that won SB's since 1994 by having a winning season his first year. Third, IF you are going to choose a veteran, at least half the time you're choosing one with a losing record!! Now be honest. You think you can pick out which veteran HC will succeed based on these stats? So unless a 1st time HC shows ineptitude in his first few years there's no reason to think he's less likely to win a SB than a veteran HC. And there's no pattern to what kind of veteran HC you should choose. Also.. you want to be very certain you missed on a coach before firing him. I'd give Gase 3 years (so up to 2018) before possibly firing him.
Using data to back up an argument is not a "crossword puzzle". Your blueprint simply isn't the blueprint for most SB winning coaches since 1994.
He seems to be picking candidates from a world were known quality assets are just falling off the vines. We're not the only team on the field. Walter, throw some names out there, who would you replace Gase with that's not already employed or could possibly be available after the season ends? Would you suggest firing mid season, or at least wait it out?
This is why I like looking at success rate for RBs in addition to the other stats. 19 rushes, 1 yard each. Run #20, goes for 91 yards. 20 carries, 100 yards, 5 ypc. Success rate is only 5% though. The guy who was #1 success rate last year according to FO was Gillislee. People on this very forum laughed when I pointed that out, when pointing to Ajayi being 32 (I didn't place that all on Ajayi, but also the Oline, but was pointing it out). Gillislee on a different team is still #2, with a 57% success rate.
It's an arbitrary stat. FO never explains how they get those "40% on first down, 60% on 2nd down, etc.." thresholds. And if you choose different thresholds you get different rankings. A more justifiable approach would be to just report the standard deviation away from the mean for a given player's performance on a given play. For example, if it's 3rd and 7 in some game situation (e.g. down by 7 in the 4th quarter) and you have the distribution of all yards gained by RB's in NFL history in that situation, then just report in standard deviation units (z-scores) how far away from the mean that RB's yardage gained was. Simple, transparent and informative. FO doesn't do that because they really really want to claim they've developed a method of apportioning credit among different players (RB, OL, etc..) using stats alone. Thing is, no statistical method can do that right now, which is why they never explain where they get those "40%, 60%, etc.." thresholds: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/methods http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2004/introducing-running-back-success-rate Anyway, I fully expect people to keep reporting FO "stats" but it's still worth pointing out from time to time that they're based on hidden and arbitrary assumptions. This kind of critique helped shape some posters' opinions of ESPN's QBR (which has the same problem) and maybe over time it will do the same for "success points/rate" using DVOA.
Yea! All he's done is catch more passes in his first three years than anybody. Ever. Sucks for us! having a WR who's really really good at catching footballs on our team!
I saw him quit in a couple games this year. Now he's lining up wrong and getting plays wrong. Easy to catch passes when they're close to the line of scrimmage. Other than last year the passes weren't that efficient. The fact he's catching so many damn passes is a symptom not a feature. Means we don't have a better playmaker on the team and our offense is easy to shut down. Or defenses just take their chances and let us keep funneling passes through to Landry. Cuz most of the time they won't get burned for more than a few yards. Landry is a great slot receiver. I'd like a great boundary receiver.
They're not the one using success rate. Of course it should arbitrary everything is. Passer rating is. They don't need to explain exactly why they used those thresholds it's pretty obvious.
The point of my post was that all these great candidates are either unavailable or don't fit your criteria. Gruden has had many chances to coach here, I doubt he's interested. If it was a money issue, he'd already be coaching. Mentioning names fosters good discussion. IF there was a vacancy, I'd be interested in Todd Bowles. I wasn't happy when he was passed over for Philbin. Other than that, it would more than likely be a promotion from another coaching position on another team. I'm not that familiar with other candidates. McDaniels sounds interesting though.
They do when they (falsely) claim they have a statistical method for estimating how much credit/blame different players/units on a team deserve. Also.. not every statistical method is "arbitrary". In fact many are not. What I described to you in post #185 using z-scores isn't arbitrary because that's just inferred from data with no extra assumptions, and that approach gives you the kind of result you were asking for. That is, if a RB has one huge gain but is otherwise below average, his average z-score would be low compared to a RB that is consistently average or slightly above.
Todd Bowles doesn't fit your criteria. He has a losing record so far as HC (21-23). So you want to get rid of Gase even if no one available at the end of the season fits your criteria? That makes no sense to me at all. And it shouldn't make sense to you either.
And some of us like to believe that Gase is getting positive results from this team and will be here longer because of it. I like that he doesn't baby the team, his outburst before trading Ajayi was a refreshing departure from the previous clueless and softer personalities spouting coach speak after a loss. Losing and poor performances do not sit well with this coach and he did something about it.
Walter, you're the last person that should go around acting like other people have English comprehension issues. Practically every post of yours is full of grammatically incorrect sentences that are better described as just a bunch of words strung together in some rambling fashion. So if you think others aren't understanding what you're trying to say, it's because you're apparently not capable of explaining things precisely enough. Either way, all I did was respond to what you actually wrote. I'm sure most others who understand English can see that.
I think your expectations are a little unreasonable and delusional. You complain about a problem on the team, that the coach addressed. And then complain that he did something about it.
Lol..walter, no disrespect, I do have to focus on your writing much more to make it flow in my brain..
There’s some luck involved but winning close games is a skill. CKparrothead made a post in Club a few weeks ago about how New England has killed it in close games during the Brady/Belichick era. We’d all like to go “full madden” and win every game by 20 plus points but when you win those close ones that’s coaching, execution and QB play usually. Plain and simple.
Also, the table isn't broken down into separate columns for wins by so many points - it just states wins & losses. All good/great teams find a way to win, doesn't matter if it's by 1 or 20 (although maybe better for everyone's health if we could bring out a big win )
WHAT? Please tell me you are joking or that this is some byproduct of obvious self over medicating from the crack bong. I thought the point of changing coaches is to improve over the prior coach. If those are the options PLUS Gruden I would rather keep Gase.
There may be more, but I am not in favor of moving on from Gase. I am a fan, if that wasn't already obvious.
The players generally. It's not like they are quiet about disliking McAdoo right now. That and the play on the field. Players just not trying, half assing, etc.
Cool, so let the year play out and we can see later. There are 0 upgrades available now. Likely not any to be had later. Gruden ... his name always pops up and nothing ever happens. The dude is being paid a fortune to do nothing while still being a big part of the game, he has 0 reason to return. Jim Harbaugh ... not leaving UM. John Harbaugh ... if cut loose is 1 of 2 people I would consider. Sean Payton is the other, but yeah not after this year. Jim Schwartz? ****ing Wanny 2.0. No. Nononono. If he is your idea of an upgrade, I seriously question what you are thinking or seeing. He was terrible and incompetent. Wade Phillips is like 200 years old, and was a ****ty head coach. He's one of those dudes whose just a coordinator.
