Ryan Tannehill

"Pauly wrote:

There is zero evidence that the Pats have a better than expected win% at home. In fact the evidence is that their home win% is exactly what their away win% predicts it would be. There is no evidence that they get a benefit from systemic cheating at Foxboro.

https://www.thephins.com/threads/its-no-harder-to-win-at-ne-than-anywhere-else.93568/

If they always cheat, which improves their win percentage across the board, then....

"Pauly wrote:

There is zero evidence that the Pats have a better than expected win% at home. In fact the evidence is that their home win% is exactly what their away win% predicts it would be. There is no evidence that they get a benefit from systemic cheating at Foxboro.

https://www.thephins.com/threads/its-no-harder-to-win-at-ne-than-anywhere-else.93568/

Nobody claimed they ONLY used their vault of other teams' playbooks and extra speaker at home.

Another way Pats' defenders trip over their own arguments......

They act like EVERY other team cheats, without real evidence to back that up.....

But then act like the Pats don't cheat, but if they did, they only do it in the one way (taping of signals), even though there's mountains of evidence they've cheated in numerous different ways, from messing with equipment like game balls to having an always on speaker in Brady's headset. But could they be possibly be cheating ion any other way? Oh noooooooooooo. Never. Every other team? Yes absolutely, but not the team that gets caught cheating every 5 years.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-offensive-line-rankings-following-2019-regular-season

Like I was saying, the Titans have an overall solid OL.

This doesn’t diminish what Ryan Tannehill has done, but just an example of how hyperbolic it can get in here at times.

Yeah that post was just a giant salt mine. As if it's impossible for a QB to get by off of smarts and improve his arm strength once he gets into the league.

"cbrad wrote:

When confronted with this absurdity, ESPN stopped listing Batch's 99.9 in their overall ranking of best QBR by introducing a convenient threshold for minimum number of passing attempts that excluded Batch (Batch had only 17 attempts in that game).

Well, ESPN is obviously close to the sports world and I'm sure they were asked 100 times a day, "How is it that the QB who's leading in passer rating and just about every major passing stat is ranked 16th overall in your formula?" And like magic, in one single week with one good recognized game (which wasn't any more impressive than his last 5-6 games), he jumps from 16th overall to 9th overall. You said he was 8th so maybe I counted wrong...I think it was 9th though.

In any case, I don't see how any quarterback can jump 7 or 8 slots in a single week...I think the entire thing is a fraud (possibly even more-so than you do)!

"Cashvillesent wrote:

Yeah that post was just a giant salt mine. As if it's impossible for a QB to get by off of smarts and improve his arm strength once he gets into the league.

Not saying he's not football smart to a high degree...not saying he didn't improve his athleticism and fitness over the years...he most certainly did. I'm saying the process was greatly added to by their "methods." The facts are there, you can deny 'em all you want.

Edit: What do you say about the 3 times before this year they were caught cheating? To include, do you believe all 3 happened, and to what extent do you think they could help a team? If you can't answer those, it's all for naught.

"Fin D wrote:

Another way Pats' defenders trip over their own arguments......

They act like EVERY other team cheats, without real evidence to back that up.....

But then act like the Pats don't cheat, but if they did, they only do it in the one way (taping of signals), even though there's mountains of evidence they've cheated in numerous different ways, from messing with equipment like game balls to having an always on speaker in Brady's headset. But could they be possibly be cheating ion any other way? Oh noooooooooooo. Never. Every other team? Yes absolutely, but not the team that gets caught cheating every 5 years.

Summed up nicely. Deniers will never see the irony in that.

"Fin D wrote:

Another way Pats' defenders trip over their own arguments......

They act like EVERY other team cheats, without real evidence to back that up.....

But then act like the Pats don't cheat, but if they did, they only do it in the one way (taping of signals), even though there's mountains of evidence they've cheated in numerous different ways, from messing with equipment like game balls to having an always on speaker in Brady's headset. But could they be possibly be cheating ion any other way? Oh noooooooooooo. Never. Every other team? Yes absolutely, but not the team that gets caught cheating every 5 years.

Dude, every team steals signals or whatever, and the other "cheats" you listed off are absurd. You're just coming off as a butt hurt brady hater. I honestly dont even understand the hate for him, he's an all around classy guy and one of the few guys who praises his team/teammates and doesn't talk a load of crap.

"Fin D wrote:

There's nothing to stop. Quit stalling and make an actual point. So far, your argument in favor of the Pats has amounted to little more than, "Yeah so, you're jealous!!!!! They're great!!!!!!!!! Why U Mad Bro?!!"

Answer for the scenario I laid out, this is now the 3rd time I've asked you.

You just called Belichek a failure, wich is not even close to being true. Im done arguing with you.

Anyone whos watched football more than 15 plus years now that Belichek has always been a genius way before he even arrived in NE.

"PhinFan1968 wrote:

Without refuting one point. Facts suck don't they?

Please provide an example of the Patriots being punished to the capacity of Belichick getting suspended for a year or Super Bowls being stripped. You know, since they cheat to the capacity that created the most dominant stretch in sports history. Oh the league didn't think the "cheating" was a big enough advantage to warrant either of those happening despite 31 other fanbases foaming at the mouth for them to bring the hammer down?

"Fin D wrote:

If they always cheat, which improves their win percentage across the board, then....

The biggest joke here is you thinking only the Pats are smart enough to find some profound method of cheating and keep it under wraps for a decade while simultaneously getting caught for inconsequential things such as taping angles and allowing balls to deflate by 5% in cold weather.

So Belichick, in all his evil wisdom, is keeping some magical super dynasty creating cheating technique hidden from everyone but also willing to get caught doing borderline useless nonsense and having the NFL magnifying glass on them for everything?

Make sure you check under your bed for the boogyman tonight bud.

"Fin D wrote:

Another way Pats' defenders trip over their own arguments......

They act like EVERY other team cheats, without real evidence to back that up..

Atlanta with artificial crowd noise at home. Is making it too loud for the opposing offense to hear plays not a slight competitive edge?

Mike Tomlin literally attempting to trip Jacoby Jones returning a kickoff down the sideline. Oh but that wasn't the Patriots and it was funny haha

Also a quick google search turned up this

https://www.bucsnation.com/2012/10/1/3437246/bucs-cheat-redskins-how-headset-cheating-is-hurting-the-nfl

But it's the Bucs and they're not winning enough for anyone to care lol

Non-Patriots teams getting caught doesn't make for good headlines.

LOL...k

"PhinFan1968 wrote:

Nobody claimed they ONLY used their vault of other teams' playbooks and extra speaker at home.

As I understand it, and I am willing to be corrected if anyone knows better, the home team provide the communications gear for both teams.
That is leaving aside the fact that this would be absurdly easy for the NFL or any other team to detect just by listening for the signals sent within the stadium.

"PhinFan1968 wrote:

Look what happened when they didn't tape the Dolphins sidelines.....

And you can call it ridiculous, if that's how you see it, that's how you see it. It's all good.

Many people agree with you, many people don't. We'll likely never know the full extent to which the cheating (that you and others flatly CAN NOT deny) helped them.

Remember...6th round QB, not on ANY scout or team's radar, very poor athlete in comparison to his peers, below average arm. Here's some scouting reports on him:

“He had that great bowl game but I think he’s just very common,” a scout of NFC team said, according to McGinn. “He’s a bony, very thin kind of guy. God, you can see his ribs on his build. His arm is just adequate.”

“I don’t like him,” said the scout. “Smart guy. That’s it.”

--Poor build
--Skinny
--Lacks great physical stature and strength
--Lacks mobility and ability to avoid the rush
--Lacks a really strong arm
--Can’t drive the ball downfield
--Does not throw a really tight spiral
--System-type player who can get exposed if forced to ad lib
--Gets knocked down easily
--5.28 40 yard dash, 24" vertical

But he was smart. Smart enough to shift his vision when told where to go with the ball, DURING the play, through an illegal speaker in his helmet (this speaker's existence is FACT, by the way...tin-foil hat not required...you can believe it, it won't make you a conspiracy theorist). On a team, that has been PROVEN to know what plays a team was running against them for years.

Too much there to ignore, unless you're blinded by rings.

Johnny Unitas - cut by the Steelers
Bart Starr - 17th round draft pick
Kurt warner - packing grocery shelves.
JaMarcus Russel #1 overall
Ryan Leaf - #2 overall

pre-draft exoectations are never wrong

"Pauly wrote:

As I understand it, and I am willing to be corrected if anyone knows better, the home team provide the communications gear for both teams.
That is leaving aside the fact that this would be absurdly easy for the NFL or any other team to detect just by listening for the signals sent within the stadium.

They used a completely separate comms system on its own frequency (not monitored by or known to the NFL) for the extra speaker.

This stuff all came out in a New York Times article back when it happened...somewhere around 2006 IIRC.

"Pauly wrote:

Johnny Unitas - cut by the Steelers
Bart Starr - 17th round draft pick
Kurt warner - packing grocery shelves.
JaMarcus Russel #1 overall
Ryan Leaf - #2 overall

pre-draft exoectations are never wrong

I just want to point out the first two come from an era where scouting wasnt even remotely the same.

Also pretty much everyone knew Jamarcus was going to fail. It was basically like a joke, because his only skill was to throw a ball through a brick wall and being incredibly large. I'd argue the Raiders went against pre-draft conceptions of Russel by taking him #1.

Leaf I was too young so I cant comment on.

Btw I do agree scouting is imperfect I'm just not sure those are all great examples.

"Cashvillesent wrote:

Atlanta with artificial crowd noise at home. Is making it too loud for the opposing offense to hear plays not a slight competitive edge?

Mike Tomlin literally attempting to trip Jacoby Jones returning a kickoff down the sideline. Oh but that wasn't the Patriots and it was funny haha

Also a quick google search turned up this

https://www.bucsnation.com/2012/10/1/3437246/bucs-cheat-redskins-how-headset-cheating-is-hurting-the-nfl

But it's the Bucs and they're not winning enough for anyone to care lol

Non-Patriots teams getting caught doesn't make for good headlines.

Not one of those is even close to what the Patriots were doing in Spygate.

why are you trying to start a debate on the Patriots cheating? We have had it far too many times in here.

"cbrad wrote:

If a QB rating system with a range from 0 to 100 says that those two sets of stats (Batch and Foles) correspond to only a 1.6 point difference in QB rating, then as far as I'm concerned that's a sign there's something wrong with that rating system. And ESPN implicitly admitted to that by trying to hide the embarrassment.

I'm not sure that holds because what you're using as the criterion against which to determine the validity of QBR is (in effect) traditional passer rating, which doesn't incorporate two major variables: 1) expected points added (EPA), and 2) win probability added (WPA). You could just as well criticize traditional passer rating for its elevation of Foles's game by using QBR as the criterion and saying Foles's game didn't do as much as Batch's with regard to EPA and WPA, and traditional passer rating is therefore "invalid." Which measure should be the criterion?

Regarding your question of "at what point in terms of sample size does QBR become a valid representation of a QB's ability", you can't even ASK that question with a proprietary formula! With traditional passer rating where you know what goes into it, it's meaningful to ask questions like whether with large enough sample size stuff like WR ability averages out, regardless of whether you can answer the question or not.

But what's the comparable question for QBR? We have no idea what question to ask because we don't know what's in the formula! Like.. are we supposed to ask whether the unknown (subjective) weights "average out"? Who knows.

No.. to answer the question of how "valid" any formula is for representing QB ability you need to know what's in it. No way around that.

I'm not sure I follow there either. If we had a gold standard criterion against which to determine the validity of QBR with regard to quarterbacks' ability, we could easily determine the correlation between it and QBR and have a measure of QBR's validity, without necessarily knowing what's in the QBR formula, and then determine the sample size at which it becomes valid in that regard.

So much for not playing well at the end of the season.

[ATTACH:full]

"Cashvillesent wrote:

Dude, every team steals signals or whatever, and the other "cheats" you listed off are absurd. You're just coming off as a butt hurt brady hater. I honestly dont even understand the hate for him, he's an all around classy guy and one of the few guys who praises his team/teammates and doesn't talk a load of crap.

As I said, your defense boils down to two things:
1. Everyone who doesn't felate the Pats is stupid and jealous.
2. Nebulous assumptions passed off as fact without real evidence, like, "everyone does it".

"Cashvillesent wrote:

You just called Belichek a failure, wich is not even close to being true. Im done arguing with you.

Anyone whos watched football more than 15 plus years now that Belichek has always been a genius way before he even arrived in NE.

He was a failed HC in Cleveland. Your ignorance on that topic isn't a point in your favor.

"Cashvillesent wrote:

The biggest joke here is you thinking only the Pats are smart enough to find some profound method of cheating and keep it under wraps for a decade while simultaneously getting caught for inconsequential things such as taping angles and allowing balls to deflate by 5% in cold weather.

So Belichick, in all his evil wisdom, is keeping some magical super dynasty creating cheating technique hidden from everyone but also willing to get caught doing borderline useless nonsense and having the NFL magnifying glass on them for everything?

Make sure you check under your bed for the boogyman tonight bud.

No, the biggest joke, is the scenario that I've already laid out for you and asked you to answer for....four times now, and you of course haven't.

"Cashvillesent wrote:

Atlanta with artificial crowd noise at home. Is making it too loud for the opposing offense to hear plays not a slight competitive edge?

It provides the same advantage as stadium built to be loud. Its literally nothing and it is beyond pathetic that you would compare that to taping signals or leaving the QBs headset on.

"Cashvillesent wrote:

Mike Tomlin literally attempting to trip Jacoby Jones returning a kickoff down the sideline. Oh but that wasn't the Patriots and it was funny haha

Really? This is how stupid your argument is. Hell you could have used the Jets coach, who actually was trying to trip the player and actually did, and was also fired. But that wouldn't fit into your absurd narrative.

"Cashvillesent wrote:

Also a quick google search turned up this

https://www.bucsnation.com/2012/10/1/3437246/bucs-cheat-redskins-how-headset-cheating-is-hurting-the-nfl

But it's the Bucs and they're not winning enough for anyone to care lol

Non-Patriots teams getting caught doesn't make for good headlines.

Wanna take a guess who the team to get the first complaints about those headset shenanigans was?

"The Guy wrote:

I'm not sure that holds because what you're using as the criterion against which to determine the validity of QBR is (in effect) traditional passer rating, which doesn't incorporate two major variables: 1) expected points added (EPA), and 2) win probability added (WPA). You could just as well criticize traditional passer rating for its elevation of Foles's game by using QBR as the criterion and saying Foles's game didn't do as much as Batch's with regard to EPA and WPA, and traditional passer rating is therefore "invalid." Which measure should be the criterion?

I'm not sure I follow there either. If we had a gold standard criterion against which to determine the validity of QBR with regard to quarterbacks' ability, we could easily determine the correlation between it and QBR and have a measure of QBR's validity, without necessarily knowing what's in the QBR formula, and then determine the sample size at which it becomes valid in that regard.

There is no "gold standard" or "ground truth" we can compare any proposed QB rating system to because there is no known way to independently measure QB ability. Anyone proposing how to do so will face the same questions I'm posing here. I mean.. if you say you have a solution but keep the method a secret how could you ever convince anyone you've accurately measured QB ability???

And regarding the Charlie Batch example, I'm not saying it makes no sense because of what passer rating says. I'm saying it's counter-intuitive to say two QB's should have a similar rating when one is WAY better statistically in every single category that has a decent or strong correlation to win%. You have to ask whether the results make sense (because there is no "ground truth" to compare to). And ESPN agrees it doesn't. They didn't come out and try to defend Charlie Batch's 99.9 rating. They did what they could to hide the embarrassment.

Also, it doesn't matter if QBR incorporates EPA or WPA if they also add subjective assumptions. ONE subjective assumption destroys any credibility you gain by using EPA and WPA. Besides, EPA and WPA have their issues too. The extremely small sample sizes with unlikely to occur situations (e.g., 2nd and 17 at the 24 yard line) means they're not reliable across a good sized range either.

"cbrad wrote:

There is no "gold standard" or "ground truth" we can compare any proposed QB rating system to because there is no known way to independently measure QB ability. Anyone proposing how to do so will face the same questions I'm posing here. I mean.. if you say you have a solution but keep the method a secret how could you ever convince anyone you've accurately measured QB ability???

And regarding the Charlie Batch example, I'm not saying it makes no sense because of what passer rating says. I'm saying it's counter-intuitive to say two QB's should have a similar rating when one is WAY better statistically in every single category that has a decent or strong correlation to win%. You have to ask whether the results make sense (because there is no "ground truth" to compare to). And ESPN agrees it doesn't. They didn't come out and try to defend Charlie Batch's 99.9 rating. They did what they could to hide the embarrassment.

Also, it doesn't matter if QBR incorporates EPA or WPA if they also add subjective assumptions. ONE subjective assumption destroys any credibility you gain by using EPA and WPA. Besides, EPA and WPA have their issues too. The extremely small sample sizes with unlikely to occur situations (e.g., 2nd and 17 at the 24 yard line) means they're not reliable across a good sized range either.

I'm just hoping X - Y = B squared to the 1/3 tenth equates to Ryan Tannehill just went into Foxboro and ended the miserable Pat's dynasty we have endured for nearly 20 seasons.

"Fin-O wrote:

I'm just hoping X - Y = B squared to the 1/3 tenth equates to Ryan Tannehill just went into Foxboro and ended the miserable Pat's dynasty we have endured for nearly 20 seasons.

Would be awesome wouldn't it?

But whatever Tannehill does in his first playoff game, the stat I'm most excited about is Brady's 88 rating, which is lower than the league average of 90.8 and is the first time in Brady's career that's ever happened. That seriously gives me hope Brady is nearing his end. I have no idea what Belichick will do. He's already 67 and not too many coaches coached past that point, but he doesn't look like he's retiring yet.