Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by bbqpitlover, Oct 16, 2019.
Im liking Pees over Martingdale. He was outcoached in the last SB vs Pees.
He was just the linebackers coach in that SB. And was on the same team as Pees. Did you mean Pees over Roman?
They do more than figure out coverages. We were using that as but one example of the numerous things the coordinators who devise gamelans do.
And again, that isn't a failure of logic on my part, it is a failure of common sense on yours. You are literally saying coordinators can't figure out what happens on a given play. My god, think this through, how do they make the gameplan if they don't know what is they are looking at on the field?
I literally don't understand how a person can so little understanding of the subject they argue about.
What do you think coordinator does exactly?
I never said that. I said there's no evidence that they can accurately estimate which of the offense or defense was more responsible for a given play. Obviously you don't understand why your logic is wrong (technically it's not "logic"), but that's a claim for which evidence is actually needed. You can't infer that just from someone developing a gameplan.
Anyway, we're going in circles. You don't get it. So have the last word on the subject and let's move on.
Baldwin was a great possession receiver. One of the best route runners I seen.
Golden Tate, Tyler Lockett, DK Metcalf
That is the same thing. If they couldn't;t accurately tell what happened and why they wouldn't have a job. That is literally their job. And you don't get it.
And you're needing to understand what I'm claiming before arguing against it. In the example above, Seattle's offense was driving and about to score and New England's DEFENSE stopped Seattle from scoring the go ahead touchdown and winning the game. That's pretty self-explanatory but looking at it from other examples which applies to every game...
Atlanta and New England in the Super Bowl...Midway through the 3rd quarter after Matt Ryan threw yet another touchdown and Atlanta took a 28-3 lead, the Patriots DEFENSE stepped up and stopped the Falcons offense, giving their offense more opportunities to catch up. Most herald the Brady but if it weren't for that defense that wasn't able to stop Atlanta's offense, the Patriots would have lost that game.
Super Bowl 50, the Panthers and the Broncos...all eyes were on Manning but the Panthers had the league's top offense, but the Broncos had the league's top defense, a defense that shut down Newton and the Panthers offense, limiting them to one TD in the 2nd quarter and a measly field goal in the 4th. The Bronco's defense had 7 sacks on Newton and 4 forced turnovers. Defense won that championship, despite the Panther's top rated offense.
Super Bowl XLVIII, Seattle and the Broncos...again, the league's top offense in the Broncos against the league's top defense in the Seahawks. The Seahawks' defense didn't allow the number one offense in the league a score until the final play of the 3rd quarter, 36-0 up to that point.
I can even flip the coin on these few examples to explain the point on another angle. Take the game I just illustrated. The Broncos' defense FAILED to stop the Seahawks...the Broncos defense LOST the game, never stopping the Seahawks offense.
The job of the offense is to score points. The job of the defense is to prevent that from happening. If the offense wins the encounter, the defense failed. If the offense fails, then the defense wins.
Now keep in mind, contrary to how it may sound...I'm an OFFENSIVE guy. My knowledge of offense far exceeds that of defense but the one thing I know, if the offense fails to score, then the defense won.
Interesting idea. I don't remember you saying this before in one of our debates. However, there are three issues I see:
1. For almost every defense, the percentage of drives by the opposing offense that end in a score is less than 50% across the regular season. In 2019 that was true for ALL defenses, no matter how bad, with the average across the league being 35.7%:
How do you interpret that? Even teams with losing records tend to have defenses that "win" most drives, and you're going to use this as a way of determining which unit was more responsible for winning??
2. Point #1 shows that the game at the NFL level is biased towards defense using your definition. That doesn't mean defense is more important for winning. All it shows is that you have to remove this bias before you can see which unit performed better relative to its peers.
And I'm sure you won't be surprised if I tell you z-scores remove that bias. Why? Because they are defined relative to league averages.
3. Point #2 shows we need to use something like z-scores. But let's be clear: these need to be z-scores for the percentage of ALL drives that were "won" by the offense or defense of the winning team. You can't cherry pick a drive you deemed crucial like with the examples you gave and ignore all other drives to arrive at some conclusion. All drives matter. Theoretically each drive matters to the degree it changed win probability. But even without fancy stuff like that, you can't just look at one drive to reach a conclusion.
What would be the result if we used z-scores here? Essentially the same as z-scores using points because the more scoring drives you have the more points you score. The only discrepancy will be FG vs. TD, but over large sample size that difference (mostly) goes away because z-scores for points will correspond to average points scored per scoring drive. So the overall conclusions won't change here.
that’s pretty silly... it’s become obvious that Wilson was always the man leading the offense with great efficiency in the passing game and timely off script plays to help his offense convert..you keeping thinking he isn’t what he is, everyone else will see you at his hall of fame induction..
Watch the player, not the ball.
I always find it funny when I see folks compare Wilson’s passer rating with the other top qbs in football, which he is always in the elite category, all the while understanding that passer rating has nothing to do with the production and threat you are getting with the guys legs, add that production to passer rating, compare it to everyone else then let’s see where he stacks up..he leaves everyone in the dust.
you have my criteria confused.
I never said he sucks, you can win games with Ryan, even make the playoffs,i just don’t trust his skill set when the intensity gets ratcheted up
Yes, that narrative and analysis does point in your favor Res..I think that can be the case while saying that his skillset may not be trustworthy under tremendous pressure..
He did make a hell of a throw under pressure last week, should give him more confidence..
And neither do many of his supporters here. Note how his performance tomorrow is being handicapped in advance even by them.
The simple answer...YES! If the object of the game is to score the most points, then the team whose defense prevents that wins the game.
It does indeed mean defense is more important for winning! If your team is facing the incredible talent of good offense led by someone like Rodgers, Brees, Mahomes...your defense is even MORE vital for shutting down those units that are capable of running up the scoreboard. [/QUOTE]
You're absolutely correct...ALL drives matter. In the first example, I used the clutch play of New England's defense with virtually no time remaining to stop the Seahawks, but in the other examples, there was a more broad example of how the defenses shutting down the offenses, preventing them from scoring at all (virtually) that won the game. [/QUOTE]
Your z-score analysis isn't relevant Brad, not because you can't use that to evaluate and overall output. Anyone can take any set of numbers and try to determine WHAT happened. That's all theoretical. There's theory and then there's real world application. There's what should happen on paper and what actually happens in application.
I don't know DJ..I think he did pretty well against Kansas City and New Orleans.
Please. You trashed Tannehill repeatedly until 2016. Then when you realized he was good you changed your argument to he can't win in the playoffs. David Carr was a better QB, Tyrod Taylor was a better qb, Kirk Cousins was better, Mariotta, FLacco, pretty much everyone. I think you had Tannehill ranked in mid 20s but yeah you never said he sucked.
Wilson never won a super bowl since that 2013 team which any QB in the league could have won with. Marino never won a super bowl. McNair never won. Using your criteria they all suck. Only brady, brees, foles, flacco, Roethlisberger are good.since they won super bowls
Or teams respect their run game whether it is working in a particular game or not........ You can use the formulas but you don't have any insight to what the numbers might mean.
Who was the MVP in that Super Bowl again? A defender.
BS.. always been consistent.. your too sensitive and close to your viewpoint.
Yeah if thinking he wasn’t a top 15 qb is trashing him then I’m guilty.
Keep saying stupid **** like Wilson is average..don’t debate Wilson anymore, sorry..
Dude...YOU HAVE TO WATCH THE GAMES.
Frankly, if your stats are telling you that the run game didn't affect his passing, you again, don't understand football. When you have a defense that is holding opponents to 16ppg, and you have Lynch dominating on the ground, of course it makes a difference... Whether your stats can show it or not.
Wow.. that is the ONE answer I was hoping you were not going to give me, but so be it.
This is what you're saying. The Ravens, who were #1 on offense this season with a 14-2 record won EVERY one of their 14 games with their defense not offense and lost both of their 2 games because their defense failed to stop the offense. Because in every one of their 14 wins their defense prevented the opposing offense from scoring on 50% or more of the drives, while in both losses they couldn't do that.
So you're basically saying that even that 59-10 win against the Dolphins was won by their defense not offense, etc...
TDK.. your argument isn't that "Defense wins championships". Your argument is this:
"Because football at the NFL level is biased against offenses, almost EVERY game EVER played was won by the defense"
That's your argument. So for you this has nothing to do with playoffs or championships. For you defense wins basically every game.
We can go further with your approach. In basketball (NBA) almost every game ever played was won by the offense. In soccer there has NEVER been a game won by offense. Yeah.. this kind of analysis is useless for me because it tells you NOTHING about the teams (you're not comparing to other teams in any way), it's just telling you about the nature of the game.
That's BS. People give alternatives that COULD happen when people like you say things like,"Well, Tannehill will have to do X to win." You have been trying ALL season to diminish what Tannehill did.
Ahh the ole minimize Wilson’s accomplishments to prop up Tannehill, back to that joke of a narrative I see..
Well, to be fair, the conversation currently is around defense or offense winning championships, so I can see why they bring that up.
However, to win a Super Bowl, you need a good offense and good defense.
No that wasn't intended at all. It was more to show how dominant that defense was, and we ALL know what that means to a team, when you can put together that type of a defense in the NFL.
LOL. Dude hypes up one QB, who had below average stats against that same Ravens team, but says Tannehill sucks if he doesn't put up stats that are "indicative of play to contribute to a win," then says people are handicapping Tannehill if he were to put up the same numbers as his elite guy. Not circular at all.
For the record, I made that post about Wilson's stats against the Ravens for this EXACT reason...worked like a charm.
Can't help but notice he STILL REFUSES to breakdown Tannehill's 15 pass attempts. I mean, he can study stats and find crazy minutia to try to twist what Tannehill did this season, but he can't take 20 minutes to back up his claim that Tannehill played poorly? Instead, he refers to a box score, which only gives you results, and doesn't give any info on WHY those stats are what they are, and then applies those stats to back up his own premise.
Good thing we’ve been told that weather doesn’t matter. We can ignore this.
If Tannehill doesn't go 35-40, for 500+ yards, 5tds 0ints, he'll be a failure.
I could have told everyone what this guy’s MO is. Same as it was on finheaven. He just recycles his unsupported claims. He makes them. They get shot down. He ignores that they get shot down (and doesn’t attempt to complete the debate). He waits a few days and then makes them again. Ad nauseam.
Oh yeah, he's been doing that here forever also. It's bad faith posting, but he's allowed to do it for some weird reason.
Silly Pats fans...
I can’t wait to see the argument that those 5 incompletions prevented his team from having a statistical likelihood to win a game that they actually won......
At this point, I DON'T CARE if they beat the Ravens. The Titans SHOULD NOT beat the Ravens. Tannehill dragged that Titans team to the playoffs. QBs are human, not robotic, so they don't execute to perfection every time. Sometimes EVERY QB needs his teammates to make plays. The Titans losing would not degrade Tannehill's performance this season.
But for people like The Guy, if the Titans lose, they'll use that as vindication of their position on Tannehill. Even through their position is ridiculous. Only ONE QB comes out of the playoffs the ultimate winner. We don't then say that the other QBs just can't get it done in the playoffs.
Weather projects 90% chance of rain with 12-15MPH winds....not sure any QB's numbers are going to be pretty. What Ryan CAN NOT do is something he tends to do, fumble the football. He will need to play the cleanest game of his career in that stadium for the Titans to have a realistic shot.
Looking forward to the "conversation" after this game regardless of the outcome.
sounds like another heavy run and pa passing game day.
don’t get behind the sticks or scoreboard. You start chasing it problems. Stick witb plan a as long as possible.
control what you can control Ryan.
Heavy tight end sets favor the ravens. It’s what their offense is built around.
this weather plays right into it. So does that qbs instincts as a runner.
They played a game against SF earlier in the season in bad weather. Jackson was ineffective throwing the ball. The game was a slug fest that came down the the last play.
IMO, that is the kind of game that Tenn can win.
Hey now you're handicapping!
I’m so disappointed hearing the weather forecast.
But it’ll be interesting seeing if either QB can throw in the wind/rain if the opposing team shuts down the other’s run game.
I THINK the wind factor favors the Ravens.
I feel as if the Ravens are a team far more capable of surviving or even thriving without a (or a severely limited) passing game.
I THINK the rain favors the Titans.
I wonder how the field holds up? If it’s sloppy I THINK that favors the Titans. I’ll take Henry’s downhill style over Jackson’s herky jerky style of running. I know Ingram is no slouch but Jackson is the one keeping everyone awake at night.
Call me crazy but I trust Tannehill over Jackson if both teams are unable to establish a run game.
Ive said an awful lot without saying much of anything so I’ll end it by making my prediction.
The Ravens are the far better team. They win it 27-17.
Doh! Is there a game day thread for this game? There should be! Can someone move this in there if there is?