oldmanfan

Local newspapers should have laser focus on what is happening in their towns. That is an invaluable service. It is easy to get national news, but without a good local paper reporting in things like city council meetings, school board meetings and such citizens stay uninformed. That’s not a good thing.

How do they let Kolber go? That’s crazy.

I voted bad because we should have won the first one. But we got ridiculously outcoached.

Nothing to blame Diggs for. Right. Sure. OK.

So at the same time people emphasize that Josh needs to get the ball out quicker and that we need to run the ball more and that Kincaid needs to open the middle of the field, we also want Diggs to get more touches no matter what. The only way I can see to balance all that is to have 2 footballs involved in every play.

The game with the best play in Bills history. The Hit.

Focusing just on Josh: Learn to take the easy throw when it’s there. Focusing on the offense in general: Continue adding to the O line.

Show me proof you didn’t decide on your conclusion first. We can play that game all day. I’ve reviewed hundreds of papers and rejected many because you can tell when there is ascertainment bias. As for variables, you used one to exclude Belichick (lack of a great QB in Cleveland) because it would negate your preconceived conclusion about McD. There are many independent variables that can affect a team getting to the big game. Deciding to just ignore that shows your motivation here. Foljs, ignore this guy and what he’s trying to do here. No more comment from me since you refuse to acknowledge basic aspects of scientific investigation.

Never one to worry about the schedule. Every year some teams do better than expected, some worse.

We’ll get there. Right now we have three great QBs in the conference. Mahomes, Josh, Burrow. But things will change around them. Burrow won’t keep his WR crew. Kelce will age. Kincaid will find his way for us. And so on. Should be great football to watch for the next decade or so.

Here’s another similarity. Dungy had to face a HOF coach in Belichick and a HOF QB in Brady every year. McD has to face the same in Reid and Mahomes. Even with great QBs (Manning, Allen) it’s just not that easy to beat a combo like those.

You elect to choose a data endpoint to match your pre-conceived conclusion. I’ve seen enough authors try to do this over 40 years; it’s easy to recognize especially given the overall negativity of your posting. You’re not fooling anyone. You have numbers that you’ve really done nothing to analyze. You have not looked at any independent variables that could affect a coach making the dance. Oh, except when someone pointed out Belichick not making it in Cleveland - THEN it had nothing to do with the coach, you claimed it was because he didn’t have a franchise QB. So you apparently recognize the idea of variables, you just want to ignore them when they might cloud your preconceived notions. By the way the reason your company and Neilson and such know how many people to test is they do, or should do, power analyses to determine a statistically relevant sampling. Otherwise differences may not be relevant, I.e. random variation. Did you do a power analysis as to whether your sample size was sufficient to show that? I assume not.

The issue you have is you want to insist 2+2=5, and get upset when a lot of people tell you that you’re wrong. Your issue is you have concluded in your mind that you don’t like McD. And you go out to try and find data that is biased towards that view. Why choose getting to a SB? Why not choose winning a SB? It’s because you can twist the former to try and support your preconceived position. A classic example of ascertainment bias. And when you talk about analyzing the data, you’ve done no actual analysis. No stats, nothing. Just a bunch of numbers. And you’ve yet to provide any definitive conclusion that I can see. What you have is simply an observation. Nothing more. No reputable editor would accept this kind of analysis for any peer reviewed journal.

Correct Shaw. Basically it’s ascertainment bias but when that’s pointed out one gets accused of ad hominem attacks.

He’d withstand the physical hits better than most

And you could say that about his contemporaries as well. How well would the current guys do 30 years ago when guys like Bruce could actually hit QBs? Similar rational is why numbers for guys like Kelly, Marino and Elway exceeded HOFers from the 60s when DBs could mug receivers. You judge guys by the era they played in. Guys like Kelly and Marino could be expected to throw for 5000 yards today, given the rules that favor the passing game today. Allen will likely be a HOFer too. It is stupid to run down a former first round HOFer to support him. I would like to know how many criticizing Kelly actually saw him play. Nothing but common sense.

Comparing performances 30 years apart can’t be done because of all the rule changes. Kelly and the K Gun dominated teams. And while Allen has maybe the strongest arm ever Kelly could make all the throws. All of them. It is ridiculous to say Josh as talented as he is, is head and shoulders above a first ballot HOFer.

Did I say Kelly is better? No. You need to learn to read without trying to make everything spin to match your opinion. I said it is silly to say Allen is a country mile better than a first ballot HOFer. And I also said I love Josh. But because those go against your little narrative somehow they get omitted. Answer this for me: are you old enough to have actually watched Kelly? If you aren’t then you should try to learn something from those of us who did. If you did watch him then you should know he was tough too, and had no fear of running just like Josh. You should know that his arm, while maybe not Josh’s (which may be the strongest of all time) was plenty strong enough. Go back and watch tape of him throwing deep to Beebe, or darts down the seam to Reed. He had a huge arm. And called all the plays. Ge should have won the first SB. I would criticize him because Parcells and Belichick played to stop the K Gun; he should have just kept handing the ball to Thurman and let him run wild. The other 3 we lost to better teams. I think Allen has the potential to be an all-time great. I fully expect we will win at least one Lombardi with him at the helm, and with McD as HC. All-time greats are the ones who go into the HOF on the first ballot. Like Jim Kelly.

I could care less about doing a poll. You don’t like the current regime. Fine. But to try and say a younger guy like Josh is way better than a first ballot HOFer is silly. I would say with the rules against hitting QBs has extended QB life spans. But as long as you haven’t won improvement needs to happen, no question.

Quarterback’s prime years extend into their late 30s now. Josh has plenty of time. He talks about his analysis but he hasn’t actually analyzed anything. All he did was cherry pick a data set to match his preconceived agenda. No statistical analysis, no consideration of variables. What is his conclusion? We have some who, when challenged, can only revert to claiming ad hominem attacks.

Dismissing a first ballot HOF QB as miles behind Allen is nuts. I can only assume you are too young to have watched him.

We all want a Lombardi. To get one you have to make the playoffs. McD ads teams do that regularly. As for anyone being able to achieve that with Allen as QB, refer to Gunned’s post above about Payton. if any guy is on the hot seat it would be Dorsey.

Ridiculous.

You don’t know. That is the point. No one is saying the team falls apart without McD. Don’t be silly. What I am saying is that you cannot just assume the next guy is going to be the answer. As for a guy like Payton, I could be wrong but I believe there has never been a case where a HC has won a SB for two different teams.

Jim Kelly is a HOF QB that took a team to 4 straight Super Bowls. I love Josh but to say he is the best QB the franchise has ever had by a country mile is absurd and shows your willingness to say anything to bash the current coaching staff.