The_Dude
-
Posts
4,110 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by The_Dude
-
-
I believe you still miss the point. Nobody is suggesting you look at stats in a vacuum. You use context to analyze them. "Not a stats guy" is one thing. But to ignore a pattern, across teams and systems, seems to be putting yourself at a disadvantage, knowledge-wise.
I never said I completely ignore stats .I just said I'm not a stats guy and that's true.
Leaked phone call? Refresh my memory, please.
A couple of kids planked Buddy. The whole things embarrassing for OBD. They called the number listed for OBD and told the lady who answered the phone they were the Jacksonville GM and they wanted to talk to Nix. She transferred them to Nix. They didn't think it'd actually happen and hung up. Somehow when Buddy "called" the Jacksonville GM back the pranksters managed to record the call and put it online. On the call Buddy states he can't pay Fitz a 'backup' what the Bills were on the hook for. The pranksters were prosecuted for this.
-
I think you are arguing something that is subtly different to what The Dean is. You acknowledge that stats can be deceiving(which I am sure that The Dean agrees with).......but then seem to be generalizing in saying that stats do not matter(or interpreted: of no use). Continuing to provide examples of instances where stats can be deceiving is basically irrelevant as nobody disagrees with that.
I personally think, considering the vastness of analytics(using stats), that trying to argue that stats are of no use is a predetermined losing battle.
One could argue that a person who has no ability to analyze stats in a meaningful manner would find them of no use.....but I don't think that is where you are wanting to go with you argument......I could be wrong though.
This stemmed from my saying "I'm not a stats guy" and I'm not. I do look at stats. They do hold value but this isn't baseball where a player is what their stats are.
A DE can be double teamed all day, and only show up on the stats sheet with 1 tackle while playing a great game. He may have forced pressure but not gotten a sack. He may have forced two blockers freeing up other rushers. Stats won't show you this though.
A QB may have had a horrible year in terms of comp % but that doesn't mean he's inaccurate. He could have had a year with new receivers and a new OC which didn't manage to get on the same page. A QB can have dumb receivers who misread defenses and screw up their option routes.
You can have QBs who check down in lieu of giving the play time to develop which causes them to have a good comp % and QBR when they really weren't playing good at all.
I'm not a stats guy. I do look at them. They do have their place. But they're not definitive and I probably hold them with significantly less regard than most fans.
-
Trent Edwards didn't run out of bounds on 4th down with the game on the line. He did that when they were losing 34-7 to the Packers and it was in the last minute in the game. It wasn't admirable, but it was hardly a game-deciding play.
I've tried to block Trent out. I remember a 4th down at the end of the game where he did that and I just flipped out. Gutless.
-
No, it isn't. You compared two QBs whose completion % wasn't all that different. One had talent, but played scared. The other played with courage, but had limited talent.
Neither guy was a mad bomber, though Fitz took more chances. In the one year But even then the stats support my point.
Trent actually completed a reasonable percentage of his passes (2008, where he completed 65.5% of his passes and started most of the games) the Bills were actually 7-7 in those starts accounting for all the Bills wins that year. The next year, when both QBs were under 60% passing, the team went 6-10,. The following season (2010), both QBs completion percentage dipped again, this time Fitz was two points higher than Trent, but all miserable (57.8 to 55.8) the Bills won 4 games. Fitz's complettion percentage increased to 62% in 2011 and the team won 6 games, 2 more than when both QBs completed less than 58% of their passes.
Try again.
Here's a rule, you don't get to determine which of my points are valid. I submit that as an example. Just one of a million potential examples because it was fresh on my mind. It validates my argument. You can argue that I could have picked something stronger but you don't get to determine the validity of it.
-
It's a conjunction. The Dictionary's second example of its use is the exact way he used it: "He doesn't have the wherewithal to finish what he started."
http://www.merriam-w...ary/wherewithal
EDIT: Some dictionaries will call it a noun. And again, its original use was about money. It's often used in monetary terms. But it's used all over, I see it all the time, used to describe skill or ability or aptitude...
I've not seen it used to describe skill or ability...but then again I probably hear that word used 3 times a year...if that.
-
I'll take it as a misstep. An accepted colloquial perhaps, but a misstep none the less. I believe "mental wherewithal" makes the intention abundantly clear--mental currency.
Now that I have accepted your language rebuttal, please do better in your football rebuttal.
My rebuttals fine. Total yards didn't separate the two QBs drastically but one doubled the production of the X and the Z. Stats aren't indicative of quality QB play.
-
He used "wherewithal" correctly, sorry about that. While it originally may have been about money, it's not only about money, it's "the money, skill, etc., that is needed to get or do something." He was saying, right or wrong, that you don't have the wherewithal - the smarts, the skill, the ability, the ____ - to do something, in this case, address the issue.
I disagree on the grounds that it's a noun used for acquisition. But back to football...
Really? That's your rebuttal. OK then. I guess you don't really have the mental wherewithal (that better?) to be of much use to me on the forum.
Yeah, that's my rebuttal and an illustrative one on how stats can be deceiving.
I don't need Mannings stats to know he's good.
-
Got me on wherewithal apparently. Been using it wrong for years. Good catch. Learn something new every day
You've managed to demonstrate you understand English. You still haven't really shared anything that suggests you know football.
Not back to the football discussion. Surely my misuse of one word can't be your entire rebuttal,. Discuss, refute, agree with the facts and conclusions. That's typically how intelligent disagreements are settled, no?
2009, Trent Edwards had a comp % of over 60. Fitz had a comp % of 55. So who was the better QB that year? Stats suggest Edwards was yet when you watched them it looked to me like Fitz was better. But stats said otherwise. However, if you looked at Lees and TOs stats their production doubled in the games that Fitz played. So my proof that Fitz was better was backed in the stays of Lee and TO. Watch first and look at stats. Stats should confirm what you see. If not analyze why.
-
Yes, it's real, I wasn't sure you even had the wherewithal to address the issue. You surprised me by attempting. Good job.
K... So I don't normally do this...I don't mind typos, I'm not a 'there, their, they're' nazi... But I'm actually a pretty educated guy (who cares right?) and it's just my pet peeve when somebody tries to talk with an manner of superiority. I see you do this regularly. The problem is though (and by the way it's clear you're a smart guy) that youre using words you think you know. For example, to question my "wherewithal" is to question my finances...my ability to pay for something...not my ability or knowledge to answer a question like you clearly mistook it for.
Bro, talking down to people on the google machine just ain't cool now is it? Tell ya what, I'm more than happy to talk football but if you're going to talk to me like I'm an uneducated plebeian I'm gonna call you out when you use words you don't know.
-
Not really what happened. Tebow was given the job by the guy who drafted him. Both men consequently lost their jobs.
That's not really what happened either. Fox pulled Orton for Tebow not McDaniels.
-
Look man, I appreciate people being passionate about the team but this drivel that demands all cheer for a certain player simply by the virtue of the player being on the roster is ridiculous.
I will cheer when/if EJ throws a TD. I'll cheer because TDs are good things.
But I don't have to be happy about EJ being our QB and quite frankly I'm not. This doesn't make me a bad fan or a bad person.
-
He didn't look bad at all. Played the run better than I thought he would.
-
No. Absolutely not.
-
Gill probably discussed the time he was driving through Iowa and had a coffee with Ortons second cousin once removed. Gotta love Gill but he does get sidetracked at times.
-
Baring any intelligent reason to believe otherwise, I read "I'm not a fan of stats" and think you mean "I don't really understand how stats translate to success or failure."
Prove me wrong.
Is this real?
Wow.
There's quantitative and qualitative reasons for a players performance. I don't throw stats out but it's my nature to question them. For example, a QB can have a high QBR if he completes 28 passes at 80% but who cares if he had less than 200 yds and the team lost...stats made Trent Edwards look like a viable option at QB. Stats didnt show Trent checking down or running out of bounds on a fourth down with the game on the line. Stats made prospects like Gabbert look like viable options. Stats are good but they shouldn't be relied on to heavily. This isn't baseball.
-
Wow. I thought he'd be the 3rd for sure. Just wow.
-
The mods over there have been threatening to have the official BBMB removed for years.
That place has gotten progressively worse ever since WYO took over. She has steadily elevated her inner circle of idiots to mods as well who actively suggest that people should leave. They have succeeded in getting at least half of it shut down.
Expect more refugees to appear here.
It really went down hill after they took out the political section. Spirited debates ALWAYS resulted in infractions.
-
You realize Orton has like a 50 qb rating as a rookie. His career qb rating is basically what EJ had as a rookie.
Yet, Orton is definitely better??? Makes sense.
I'm not a fan of stats. I was sooo unimpressed with EJs rookie year. I don't believe he'll ever be good and I understand that his stats are on par with that of rookie years of quality QBs.
I understand your argument. You're not wrong in your thinking but I disagree.
-
All I took from this is that we will be starting from our own 20 yard line.
Nah I get it though. I'm not ready to bench EJ but having Orton as the backup is so much better than Tuel so to me it's a decent pickup. Could be worse. We could have Tuel as our backup.
Orton is the backup. But he is not the 'this is our backup who will play if our starter gets hurt' kind of backup. He's the 'we're not sure about our starter so we're bringing this guy in in case our starter face plants' kind of backup. There should be no doubt about that.
Dib, you're such a quality poster and it's a shame that idiots who want to replace EJ at all costs don't listen. Orton will be a great backup. He's like a dumber Fitz.
But Our worse case scenario with EJ is he has a Kyle Orton career. Only in the mind of morons, Orton is better than EJ.
I love Orton as a backup and that position improved a ton. But the idea of him playing significant games is sickening.
I'm positive Orton is better. Just my take. I think Orton is the same quality as Andy Dalton. And I'll take Andy Dalton over EJ all day. EJs physically gifted and that's not up for dispute...but that's about where it ends IMO.
-
I love how people bash the Bills for their mistakes and ignore their fallout slaughtering of the Colts in this trade.
It's also funny how the Colts' GM is thought to be good because he drafted Luck. He has made some terrible trades.
The good can't be thrown out with the bad and the bad can't be thrown out because of the good. This was a great trade for us. We took Indy to the woodshed. Indy should really quit trading...they're not very good at it.
-
Orton is a poor mans Drew Brees. He's smart and accurate. He doesn't have a cannon but he does have a bit of zip on the ball which I prefer to EJs floaters. And while Orton may not be able throw 80 yards what's wrong with a 18 yard deep out/in to Sammy? Get Sammy that ball and Sammy will make up the remaining 62 yards.
-
Greetings Dude, I haven't been banned but I got tired of waiting for the BBMB thought police to sanitize the board. I don't buy technologically how the main board can be down but every other board can work. I may set up shop here permanently.
What's up, Man! What can I say... Some people to include the Mods over there found me a little brash I guess. Oh well. But just glad I found another place to talk Bills football!
To be clear, I don't believe I called him any names. I believe he was simply owning his own douchebaggery. I find that commendable in an odd way.
Why else would someone come here and immediately announce they had been banned from another forum---and now they are here? "I guess I'll be hanging out here now" We should be honored, right? After all, the only thing he did, when others disagreed with him, was create an alternative username to harass other posters. What's the big deal. Aren't all forums just a playground for poorly thought out opinions and harassment of those who disagree with yours?
Like I said, at least he admitted it.
Well, I don't do that sort of thing. I don't find it cool to call names or things of the sort over the internet. It's just kinda cowardly.
Anyways, if committing the high crime of multiple accounts is offensive to you I am indeed guilty of that. I did it for satire because as I said I got banned without violating their Code of Conduct. I just happen to be very opinionated that our QB atop our depth chart sucks and that hurt peoples feelings I guess. Again, what I did I did as a joke. If you want to consider that douchebaggery then call me Mr Massingill.
And the reason I announced that was I had finally been banned was again..kind of a joke for people that know me from that board.
-
Orton wouldn't have been brought in if the Doug's were happy with EJ. This has nothing to do with Tuel and everything to do with Orton being their last bet to save their jobs. Of course EJ will start against the Bears but if he gets out to a rocky start it'll be Orton time by week 3 or 4.
-
Orton is the best QB we've had since Bledsoe. I know that's not saying much but it's true. With our talent at receiver this guy can win.
[closed]Tuel to PS
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I'm glad to see him stick around. He put in a lot of work and I think he has backup potential.