|
Black Sunshine posted:The Texans can't win and the rest of the AFC is very high on my poo poo list. Yeah it just doesn't seem likely that the Texans have a shot, particularly when you factor in that it's likely to snow on Sunday.
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 16:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 15:12 |
|
|
a new study bible! posted:Can't think of a better fate for a terrible towel than to be covered in poo poo and vomit... unfortunately at that point, the babies don't really poo poo and vomit on everything. Moms don't start producing milk until day 3-4 usually, so their poops are like glue and they don't really spit up dad facts!  e: also those babies should be swaddled. What you are looking at is a huge SIDS risk
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
a new study bible! posted:You sound like a good dad I have my moments, but I'm new to the game. I'm more like a B- level dad right now there's an ongoing battle over whether our son will be a Ravens fan or a Cowboys fan. I plan to win my wife over by showing her Kawalimus' posts
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 16:34
|
|
|
Intruder posted:The Texans actually play pretty well in snow, especially for a southern team, but yeah the Patriots are going to dunk all over them just like they always do yeah, they're probably swaddled under the towels, and I'm sure the towels were removed as soon as the photos were taken. I don't actually believe that the hospital put them in danger  Re: Snow, I mean it less as a point against the Texans and more in a "we're going to see a million graphs showing that Tom Brady is 400,000 - 0 when playing in snow at Foxboro on Sunday" way Intruder posted:since my wife and I went the cloth diaper route it was a real bitch lol off. I respect your commitment to environmental friendliness, but I could never have done that. Especially not now that the little guy gets in 1-2 large shits per day.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
Intruder posted:It wasn't that bad, we bought one of those bidet-like sprayers that attaches to the line leading to your toilet tank so we could just spray everything in the toilet before tossing it in the diaper buddy That's pretty cool. How old's your kid now? On a completely unrelated note, you'll at least be happy(?) to know that my wife had no qualms with me buying him Astros gear, setting him up early for a long life of baseball disappointment.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
Intruder posted:They're both out of diapers now, 6 and 3 (7 and 4 in a few months), yours? He'll be 4 months old in a week, so we have a long way to go before we're out of diapers. I want to be continually excited about the Astros, but man we just can't seem to beat the loving Rangers ever No Butt Stuff posted:lol at cloth diaper chat. Yeah I'm glad we didn't have twins. Having this one convinced us that, like the Giants this year, we'd prefer to go one-and-done. I'm sure that may soften a bit in a year or two when we've forgotten about how bad sleeping is in the first two months and we're riddled with stockholm syndrome, but I suspect this is it. It helps that we got a boy (which we both wanted) and that he's adorable
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
fishing with the fam posted:My sister had twin boys. I love those little guys, but they are exhausting after a couple of hours. I can't even imagine living with them. They are EVERYWHERE all the time. I don't regret having a kid, but he's exhausting. He's been on 2-hour cycles for the last month or so, where he wakes up, eats, then he's up for an hour, then sleeps for an hour, repeat until nighttime. We've been lucky there, though--he sleeps through most of the night. Daycare is the greatest goddamn thing ever though. I posit that it is impossible to truly appreciate your kids until you are away from them for at least a few hours a day. On a football-related note, here he is on a game day with the missus (week 14):  e: We only have Ravens gear for him right now because her best friend is also a Ravens fan and she just had a son about a year ago, so we got all that stuff. I'll fix it at some point, but gently caress if I'm gonna pay NFL prices for gear that he'll outgrow in less than a month
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
No Butt Stuff posted:^^^ wtf are they changing them every 2 minutes? kids can have a little piss in their pants for an hour. mother of god Yeah, no interest on this end. I felt a little sorry for Rodgers reading that article about him first coming onto the team and getting treated like poo poo by Favre and co, until I started reading about how he kept going after Donald Driver took him aside and told him "Rodgers, we know you're smart... now shut the gently caress up"
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
that didn't help Romo or Gronk
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
N: Here's some poo poo: The Texans-Raiders game not only beat last year's same time-slot wildcard game for ratings, it also beat the Lions-Seahawks game. To no one's surprise, the FOX Sunday game between the Packers and Giants was the big winner of the weekend in terms of ratings and viewership. Raiders @ Texans: 26.9M Lions @ Seahawks: 21.9M Dolphins @ Steelers: ~27.5 (estimated) NYGiants @ Packers: 34.3M https://sportstvratings.com/mixed-ratings-bag-for-nfl-wild-card-saturday/7258/ V: I'm actually pretty surprised by this, though part of it is driven by the size of the markets. The Texans game averaged a 31 rating across Houston/SF+Oakland, meaning that on average across both DMAs, 31 percent of households with TVs watched the game. You can see a similar effect with the Giants and the Steelers.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
Intruder posted:Brock is literally the worst starting QB in football this season (not including spot starters, or maybe even including them). Like you could probably pop Case Keenum in this offense and it'd improve drastically if they'd been giving him first team reps, I'd say the team is actually better off starting Weeden. Although I'd still take Osweiler over Lindley, who for my money owns the title of "worst ever playoff starting QB"
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
There's no "Texans win" scenario that doesn't involve multiple defensive scores and a Tom Brady injury
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:The Texans were beat 27-0 by the Patriots version of the Oakland Raiders last week (3rd string QB starting and got injured during the game. Hence the need for multiple defensive TDs
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:They're doing the skills stuff this year, right? If this was a combine event, scouts would have a much better idea of a QB's skills than they get from the wonderlic
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 05:20
|
|
is must see tv
|
Just in case you weren't sure that PFF's grades are total garbage and their analysis is terrible bullshit, they've released their rankings for the top Secondaries in the NFL, and ranked the Dallas Cowboys as #1 overall, and has increased their grade since Morris Claibourne went out with injury (Claibourne was having a breakout year). https://www.profootballfocus.com/pr...tm_campaign=nfl note: The Cowboys' defense ranks 13th in Yards/Attempt, 23rd in passer rating allowed to opposing QBs, 27th in INTs, and 31st in completion percentage allowed. The defense hasn't been bad, but that's been because it has been good at preventing teams from getting big plays and coming up big on third downs. In no serious sense is this the NFL's best secondary.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:drat societal norms. Please. One does not beat their pregnant mistress in polite company.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
fyallm posted:No, there is no reason to use q-tips. Yeah I got a blockage one time in my ears and that pretty much curtailed my q-tip use. The process for removing it wasn't bad (they basically put a bigass syringe of water in your ear and use that to force it out), but waking up unable to hear in one ear was pretty terrifying.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
fyallm posted:haha wait, people actually think the Cowboys have the best secondary in the NFL? Every week when I watch them I hope we draft another CB or DB and they turn out to be a stud... Claiborne hasn't been the greatest but I still prefer that pick vs Kirkpatrick. At the time of the draft I wanted dallas to get kirkpatrick but I think I was wrong and am glad we took Claiborne, even with all of his drat injuries. Yeah the point is that PFF is garbage and their grades are made-up nonsense. I don't agree with all of the FO stuff, but it's at least grounded in a stat process. I miss Brian Burke's site, though. Before he got bought out by ESPN (they basically bought it to cannibalize his Win Percentage Added metric to fold into QBR and to get his win probability charts), he was doing some really great work. Dallas had some major injuries in the secondary this year--Claibourne has been out since the Packers game and Church and Wilcox both missed time--but should be pretty healthy going into this week's game. The only major injuries are guys who were promising but never really made the field (Tapper, Smith) and two of our better blocking Tight Ends (Geoff Swaim, James Hanna). FizFashizzle posted:lol if yours wasn't so bad that it popped out of your ear and stuck against the wall. drat, son
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
fyallm posted:Yeah I guess I meant injuries over the years such as: Scandricks MCL, ACL. Barry Church broken arm, and Achilles tendon. Brandon Carr's broken bone in his hand. Clairbons effed up wrist, dislcoated shoulder, patellar tendon, etc . JJ wilcox (is bad) thigh injury... Im sure im forgetting others. I mean we've had injuries, but I think they're more noticeable because the team has had very poor depth, especially on the defensive side of the ball. When your best CB is only above average, then the guy behind him is probably pretty bad and losing him hurts a lot more, even if the dropoff isn't as big as it might be if he were a potential HoFer. Claibourne has gotten a pretty bad rap--most CBs take a few years to develop into competent starters and playing in a Rob Ryan defense is a losing proposition no matter how talented you are. I no longer feel like he was a bust, but I wouldn't have traded up for him (or anyone, really). It seems a lot worse when you consider that the upside to getting someone like Kirkpatrick and staying put at 14 would have been getting someone like Alshon Jeffrey (who the pick was actually used on after the Rams traded it to the Bears), Mychal Kendricks, or Bobby Wagner in the 2nd round with the 45th pick.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 17:36
|
|
|
fyallm posted:True true. I really hope we can pickup a few good one's in the draft this year, but I feel like I have been saying that for multiple drafts now. I *think* the general strategy will be to negotiate a new contract for Romo where the team converts the bulk of his 2017 salary to playing time incentives, which would become NLTBE* incentives with Dallas, no longer counting toward the cap. That would remove about $13M from his 2017 cap hit, but would count as LTBE incentives for whatever new team he joined. Then ideally, the team works out a trade that goes through on June 1st, which would put $10.7M in dead money on the books in 2017 and another $8.9M on the books in 2018. But over both of those years, Dak Prescott will cost next to nothing, leaving room to sign both the team's rookies and maybe 1-2 mid-level free agents. If the bulk of draft picks are on defense and Jaylon Smith comes back and plays well, we could be looking at an even stronger team next year. This could also be accomplished with a simple Post June 1st cut, but that's less advantageous, albeit easier to accomplish. The big challenge with a trade is that Dallas has to get under the cap before the first league year to trade Romo, so they have to renegotiate his contract prior to that point for things to work. But getting Romo off the books makes a lot of room for signing other guys. *Not Likely To Be Earned
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
fyallm posted:I could see multiple teams being interested, but knowing that we need him gone I think they wait for the post June 1st cut.... It's hard to say how the trade of Romo will work out. It's very possible he could be traded before June 1st, and the Cowboys will just eat his full dead money hit this year. That may be more likely than a team waiting to trade for him until after June 1st. With regard to his contract, it's advantageous financially to trade for him instead of waiting for free agency because 1. you don't have to bid against anyone else financially (and you know some idiot team is willing to give him a 5-year deal), and 2. If you trade for him, his contract is completely non-guaranteed at that point, making it easy to cut him after 1 or 2 years with no consequences as they relate to dead money and an easy path to restructuring. I'm hopeful Jaylon Smith will play next year. It was certainly a gamble taking him, but the Cowboys' team doctor was also responsible for performing his surgery, so I doubt they believed he'd never play again at that point (and reports suggesting as such were giving worst-case scenarios). The most recent reports suggest he could have played in this year's playoffs with a brace (supposedly he's running 4.5s right now), but the Cowboys chose not to activate him and play it safe. Given where the team is with regard to the playoffs, I think we'll see him playing next year, though I have no idea how his play will be affected or whether his knee is 100%, or if this is mostly optimistic bullshit. I have no idea if we'll take a CB with the first pick. There are a number of needs on offense and defense and it will depend on who is available at the pick. Claibourne, Church, Wilcox, and Terrell McClain are all UFAs next year, so it's entirely possible that we'll look at a Safety or DT. Top Safeties tend to go lower--late 1st/early 2nd round, so it may behoove us to pick up a top safety instead of a CB. Similarly, Leary is also a UFA next year and Free is aging and will be a UFA in 2018, so RT is also a potential position we'd look at. Similarly, CB may be less of a priority if we can improve the pass rush, reducing the amount of time our Secondary is exposed. With regard to the strengths of each position class, you'll have to ask one of the more college/draft-focused goons. I typically don't start paying attention to the draft until the combine, and don't tend to think about prospects before that. I don't know if this is a strong/weak year for CBs/Ss/LBs/DTs/DEs/whatever. I think Doltos knows more about that poo poo? TheChirurgeon fucked around with this message at 20:39 on Jan 11, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
fyallm posted:5 year deal? No freaking way.. It wouldn't surprise me. Teams are always doing dumb poo poo and Romo looked really sharp for his drive in Philly. QB is an important position. He'd never play 5 years, but I don't think a team would plan to keep him that long, either. quote:Well I think the doctor was also tooting his own horn a bit as well. It definitely didn't make sense trying to play him this year in the playoffs when I don't really think he would of added enough to warrant the risk. I could see that if he wasn't associated with the Cowboys. Seems like that's more likely to backfire if Smith ends up never able to play again. Now you not only didn't fix him, but you lied about it to your employer. Given the more recent reports. I doubt he was just 'tooting his own horn' on the issue. quote:Are you misspelling Morris last name on purpose? I had to look it up because every time I read your posts and I go to post I feel like I am spelling it wrong. Nah, I didn't realize it's "Claiborne" until that post and it's a force-of-habit on the spelling. quote:Wilcox is so bad, I would be ok letting him walk. He's not good, but you can't replace everyone. Wilcox walks, and his replacement is...? Teams are often comfortable bringing back the mediocre guys they know over total unknown JAGs. And Wilcox is still miles ahead of Heath. No one thinks Wilcox should start, but you still need backup safeties. Is Wilcox a bad backup? I'm less certain of that. quote:I mean, there aren't that many really good safety's coming out this year, so after Hooker, Jamal Adams, and Peppers it goes down alot... I would take maybe like Justin Evans with the second pick if we could. But I don't know. I should probably talk that chat to the actual draft thread It's less about that and more about where safeties tend to be drafted. Over the last 5 years of drafts, the first safety has, on average, been drafted 26th, whereas the first CB has been drafted 8th, and two of those were drafted 33rd and 48th, respectively. Would you rather have a top 3 safety in the draft or the 8th best Cornerback? Remember that best-case scenario, Dallas drafts 32nd, and at the earliest, we'll be drafting 28th. I ran some quick stats for this: Avg. Draft Pick by position, first three picks, 2012 - 2016 Safety 1 - 25.6 2 - 35 3 - 51 Cornerback 1 - 7.8 2 - 11.8 17 - 17 Amy Pole Her posted:My god I forgot Jaylon was on Dallas Supposedly well. The reports have him running a 4.5, say tests are progressing well. I think there's a good chance we see him in camp next year, even if he isn't 100%.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
fyallm posted:I think even if he comes back at the start of next season, I think it would be too early and he is going to reinjury himself badly. But only time will tell I guess. You seem to be operating under the assumption that Church will be back. If that wasn't 100% certain, would you really want to also be out his backup? Wilcox is bad, but he's not *that* bad. quote:That is what I am saying though, really there are only 3 saftey's I would even consider taking in the first round and they are really good, so I could see all 3 being gone before we get a pick, and after that I wouldn't feel that strong going with Evans. Yeah but check the chart. There's every reason to believe we'd get a top 3 safety, even with the #32 pick. The highest a #3 safety has gone in the past 5 years is #27, and that was the only time it happened in the first round. quote:And holy poo poo I forgot about Charles Tapper. Any idea on how he is recovering? Tapper was placed on IR when it was revelaed he had a pars defect in his lumbar spine. Basically a break in a specific portion of the bone that leads to separation of the front and back portions of the vertebra. Supposedly it's been something the's had for a long time, but went undiagnosed. Supposedly he's recovered and was healthy enough that the Cowboys considered activating him off IR, but chose to activate La'el Collins instead (they can only reactivate 1 player from IR). We'll see if he's any good next season.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
fyallm posted:I don't see why Church wouldn't want to come back given how strong the Cowboys are this year, and going to be even stronger next year, which means another superbowl run potentially. And Wilcox is bad, he hasn't been able to learn the position as having only played it a year at Georgia Southern. It was his 4th year this year in the league and still looked bad.'' Church may want to come back. But he'll have just had a great year on a 13-3 team. A team will probably offer him more money than the Cowboys are willing to offer, or more than we can afford. Cap space will be very, very tight for the team next year and so it's unlikely we'll be able to compete for free agents in a real fashion. Retaining Wilcox on the other hand, will be cheap. Church isn't in his prime, but at 28, he'll command one more big contract. He'll certainly get something more like the $4.5M he made this year and not the $900k he made on the first year of his deal. Plus if you had to pick one, would you rather re-sign Church or Claiborne? I'd rather sign Claiborne, because... quote:The problem with this years draft is that Hooker is going to be taken in the top 10, Jamal will be taken 11-20, Peppers will be taken 20-30 if not earlier. That straight up just doesn't happen. Over the last 5 years, no safety has gone in the top 10, and only 2 went in the top 15 (at 14th and 15th). There's only been one safety drafted in the top 5 since 1992 and that was Sean Taylor and only 7 drafted in the top 10 since 1991 (and none since 2007). Of those, only 2 were hits (Taylor and Turner), 3 were relative busts (Williams, Bates, Huff), and and the rest were merely OK (Landry, Whitner, Richard), which is probably a contributing factor in why it doesn't happen. Even if Hooker goes in the top 10, it's unlikely that all three will go in the first round. If it does, the Cowboys will have to adjust, but you asked me what I thought would happen, and I think Safety or Defensive End are more likely picks than CB based on where we are drafting. We'd be easier to re-sign Claiborne and drafting a safety than re-signing Church and attempting to draft a CB. Note that the 2011 CBA has also helped push safeties down on the draft list--it is less risky to draft expensive positions earlier because of the rookie pay scale, which ensures that teams will be more likely to trade up to draft those positions. quote:Yeah I knew he had back problem, but I wasn't sure how he was recovering. Good to hear we considered activating him, from what I remember the kid looked like he had a really good shot at being a legit good DE. I'm almost certain we'll see him in camp next year. No idea how good he'll be. Hopefully this year our draft gambles will pay off better than the 2015 gambles (Gregory... *whomp whomp*) e: When it comes to Free Agents, look back at the 2015, 2010, and 2008 offseasons. Whenever a team has a 12+ win or Super Bowl season, bad teams come out of the woodwork to sign their free agents, good or mediocre, to big deals, usually with poor results. Players lost to FA by year, following a good season: 2015: DeMarco Murray, Justin Durant, Dwayne Hrris, Henry Melton, Jeremy Parnell, George Selvie, Anthony Spencer 2010: Kevin Burnett, Chris Canty, Ken Hamlin, Cory Procter 2008: Jaques Reeves, Julius Jones, Tyson Thompson, Terry Glen, Anthony Fasano, Akin Ayodele, Keith Davis Were there some guys in there we wanted to keep? Sure. Could we have afforded to keep the likes of Jeremy Parnell or Chris Canty when they were being offered top starter money? Should we have? Nah TheChirurgeon fucked around with this message at 22:26 on Jan 11, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
Sataere posted:The problem with analyzing it this way is it assumes all draft classes are equal in strength. Getting the eighth best cornerback could be better than the best safety prospect, depending on the relative strength of that position relative to the rest of the draft class. I totally agree with you; it's not meant to be a comprehensive analysis and yes, it's possible that the 8th best CB is better than the best Safety, particularly if the best safety is only a 2nd-round prospect. That said, the point is to show that even when there's a good safety class, the position is still drafted much lower, meaning that teams drafting late are going to get more value looking for the position.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
fyallm posted:2012 Mark Baron went 7th. 2013 Vaccaro went 15th and Reid went 18th, then 2 more went 32 and 33. 2014 3 saftey's were taken before the 28th pick. 2015 was the worst Saftey's class in forever. 2016 was another crappy saftey year but 2 still went before the 18th pick. I missed Baron, but that's not making a compelling case for taking a Safety in the top 10. I'm still not convinced we'll see 3 safeties go before pick #28, particularly if this year's CB class is strong. 2015 may have been a "weak" class for safeties, but it still produced Landon Collins at the #33 pick.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
fyallm posted:The compelling case for top 10 is the fact there is Hooker and Jamal... And the Chargers need desperate help along with the Titans. And the case against is that drafting a safety in the top 10 hasn't worked out most of the time (Roy Williams was drafted before Ed Reed woooooo). The Chargers will probably draft a safety, but the Titans are just as likely to look at CB and WR with their two first round picks.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Kalli posted:Mostly use google chat for business, but there's a lot of us who prefer the quiet simplicity of AIM as do a bunch of my college friends. Slack is the new hotness, though I still use AIM and GChat
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
a neat cape posted:Lol we aren't drafting a safety you also weren't going to draft Melvin Gordon but then here we are kiimo posted:Kind of aghast that you'd forget Eric Berry drafted #5. i only went back to 2011 initially, then missed some spots when I went further back. Gonna happen when I'm only putting in so much time at work for this. TheChirurgeon fucked around with this message at 00:40 on Jan 12, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
shirts and skins posted:So Eric Berry was 5, Earl Thomas was 14, and I couldn't remember who 15 was. I was starting to think, dang, safeties don't often go high but when they do they're real studs! Yeah even with Berry, the record for top 10 safeties isn't very good. The larger point is, safeties are drafted later than CBs.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 01:55
|
|
|
hifi posted:sorry you got an all pro safety instead of travis kelce/rob gronkowski Ed Reed might be the best safety to ever play the position.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 03:11
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Yes, I mean the people in charge of the decision, not the fans. apparently even the NFL's 31 other owners thought San Diego was "salvageable" and didn't want to move the Chargers either
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
Amy Pole Her posted:Oh my god Dean Spanos what are you doing Taking his ball and going home, basically. But also Kalli posted:If they don't move, then the threat of moving the team unless they get their stadium money fails. 100% This. If cities learn that they can stand up to teams asking for half a billion dollars in stadium money, then who knows what could happen?!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
the good fax machine posted:Same here, I never heard they were changing the name but NFL Network reported that they will unveil a new logo today. oh my god I hope it's a lovely half-assed logo someone had to design in a few hours
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:Who are they even trying to send that message to? Whatever the next team is, so they can point and say "do you want to end up like St. Louis? Or San Diego? Or Oakland?" evilweasel posted:The NFL reportedly was now trying to convince Spanos to stay. Yeah but it seems like that's primarily because. A. They felt they could still get *some* kind of stadium deal out of the city, and B. They wanted to keep the threat of moving to LA open to some other team. No one is going to buy a threat to move to San Diego or London.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
Diva Cupcake posted:Blatant ripoff of the Dodgers logo. TheChirurgeon posted:oh my god I hope it's a lovely half-assed logo someone had to design in a few hours e: BTW that's really it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:I just can't get over a thirty thousand seat stadium I'll be shocked if they can even fill that for an entire season
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
hahaha omg https://twitter.com/LizHabib/status/819642167006138368
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
blue squares posted:Fewer opportunities for both teams to score. You get the ball, that's one opportunity. You do or don't, then the other team gets it. So you're right in that for the most part, time of possession has no real bearing on a team's success. The Eagles are an excellent example--this year they led the league with an average of 32:31 in TOP and went 7-9 and last year they were dead last in TOP with 25:51 and went... 7-9. And you are correct in that TOP doesn't change the number of possessions a team will have during a game, so the other team will have just as many opportunities to score. The quintessential example of this is the 2009 game between the Manning-led Colts and the Wildcat Dolphins, where the Dolphins held the ball for 45 minutes, running a grueling, run-first attack that ate the clock and scored slowly. They still lost though, because every time Manning had the ball, the Colts ran a hurry-up offense and scored, so the Colts won 27-23. Now there are some arguments for why TOP might help a team, as you've read--holding the ball for longer can help a defense stay fresh. This has certainly been true for Philly, who had one of the league's better defenses this year, but a poor offense, albeit one that could hold the ball for long stretches of time. Comparatively the Chip Kelly-led team was really good at going three-and-out very quickly, forcing their defense back out onto the field after less than a minute of time had come off the clock. Although both teams finished 7-9, this year's Eagles were probably a better team; they played a much tougher schedule and had a better point differential. Their defense certainly improved even if their offense showed little growth. Brian Burke had a really good article a few years ago that suggested that TOP was an intermediate stat (and one that generally correlates with wins): That it was difficult to actually be good at Time of Possession, but that having a high TOP was an indicator or a side-effect of being good at other fundamental things, like getting first downs and extending drives. If you think about it, there's no such thing as "running out the clock," since the clock runs regardless. There's only "running or passing successfully (and staying in bounds)," which keeps the clock running (also note that this shows another issue with TOP--winning teams tend to have a lopsided TOP advantage because late in the game they are purposely using more clock time between plays). So a team that is able to successfully move the ball will have a greater TOP advantage. Which is another reason that you should focus on efficiency stats over counting or intermediate stats when you think about measuring team success/strength. E: Note that this may not apply to situations where Andy Reid is involved, and time becomes a meaningless concept that is given no consideration whatsoever TheChirurgeon fucked around with this message at 13:36 on Jan 13, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2017 13:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 15:12 |
|
|
A Man and his dog posted:Time of possession is def an important stat. Yeah when you put it like that it seems so easy! Another thing teams mess up is not intercepting the other team's QB during their final drive
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2017 14:53
|
|