oldmanfan

If someone has a mechanical issue, such as the ball coming out of his hand a bit early, they can be precise but not be as close to the target as they want I.e. Inaccurate. Like a pitcher than keeps throwing high. Puts it pretty much in the same spot but not in the strike zone.Or a QB that oversteps during his delivery. When you say he has to put a ball in a precise spot where a WR can catch it and run, that is precision. Great throwers are both accurate and precise. And if you look look at the work done by two guys on this board who looked at a multitude of throws Allen made and graded each ine you will see he was nowhere near as inaccurate as you want to think.

McDole is also a good one. Biscuit too. Reggie McKensie. Kyle and Fred will be there eventually. Another guy that hasn't been mentioned is Tony Greene.

Byrd without question.

I think Page had contacts and that started the investigation. I can read up on the others. You think I'm underinformed, I think you have confirmation bias and look at obscure references to try and drag out things that fit your pre-conceived bias. Summaries. I should read it. Good point.

They didn't know how to contact Trump after his victory? Like the meeting with the foreign minister in the Oval?

You're amusing to be sure.

That's what Deranged said. I think there was evidence of a crime, so you investigate. And more to the point, investigations occur precisely to determine if a crime occurred. So for those of you that think Clinton, Comey, Brennan, et al should be investigated, assuming there is evidence of a crime I'm all for investigation. The argument is what constitutes evidence.

Really? I just said I'd have no problem investigating Comey, Clinton, etc. This side of the board is comical; it's all of you that have your minds made up about everything and then comically claim it's others that are like that. I come over here sometimes just for amusement.

Investigate people without the basis of a crime.

Well I disagree with that premise. The Russians interfered with our election, there is no question about that. And his campaign had contacts with folks in Riussia. So that has to be examined. And to be fair and open, look at the other side as well if such data exists.

So they should not investigate Comey, etc in your view?

My analogy is fine. You just don't want to accept it. You tried to shut down another thread by saying the subject is being discussed in other threads.. I jump in here from time to time, but it is clear there are no real discussions here. This side of the board is you and persons of your ilk all just propping each other up with your conspiracy theories. For me, investigate everything. Impeach Trump so you get all the data out, bring Clinton, Comey, whomever you want up for investigation. Throw all of them in jail and maybe then we can get people in Washington thata ctually want to work together for the good of the country vs. this incessant nonsense that we have to deal with all the time.

No, I would ask why they cannot make a definitive determination and ask what other date they would need in terms of testing etc. Then I'd make sure I got that so they'd have the data they need.

I get the acting thing for sure. My daughter is a professional actor and singer and I hear that all the time, trust me. In fact, she is waiting t hear from the Bills if she gets to sing the anthem this year. The Bills put out a request for singers, and she just kills the anthem. Keep your fingers crossed.

A question: if you went to your doctor, and he said "if we had confidence you don't have cancer, we would tell you so" would you conclude you don't have cancer? Or would you demand more testing, more information, etc?

A question: if you went to your doctor, and he said "if we had confidence you don't have cancer, we would tell you so" would you conclude you don't have cancer? Or would you demand more testing, more information, etc?

We are just going to have to disagree on accuracy vs. precision. They are different things. I appreciate your dictionary reference and Thurman has also thrown this out as somehow suggesting it ends the discussion. But anyone who has studied statistics knows they are different. All NFL QBs have to be accurate; they would never even get a whiff of an NFL practice field if they are not. But the greats combine that with being very precise, or pinpoint if you want to use that, or ball placement if that works for you. i join with you in hoping and anticipating that we'll see significant improvement in our young QB.

Good point

Ok. I give up. Accuracy and precision are different things, acknowledged by those experienced and conversant in statistics, but you want to just ignore that because it either doesn't fit your narrative or makes you think about things more than you care to. Your baseball thing? Greg Mattox. Great accuracy AND great precision - could paint the corners. If he was just precise he might hit the same spot every time, but walk every guy because that spot was out of the strike zone. Let me suggest you never make a bet throwing darts if this is your concept - you'd lose your shirt. And as for the Clay missed catch, I am not referring to the one he dropped in the end zone. Which he should have caught. I am referring to a throw across the middle where it hit Clay in the hands a bit in front of him, and a select few here want to blame Allen. When I read stuff like yours and others, I am not sure whether to accept your statement that you want Allen to succeed or not. I believe you do, hope you do, but the amount of criticism heaped on a kid after this first year, in which he missed 6 games plus where he showed improvement in his last few games is mind boggling. When did things change from when people used to understand players get better with experience to where they should be a completed project year one and then get even better from there?

Do you honestly think he's not also focused on those things? Come on now.

So you watched each game. Did you go through the exhaustive effort to chart each throw like several here have done? I bet not. Let me try and explain some things about the errors you and others make in these assessments. To preface it though, I am like you and I am an Allen fan. And like you I also see room for improvement in his play. Unlike you I disagree about this whole accuracy thing, and the reasons I disagree are two fold: 1. people including many of the so called experts you cite confuse accuracy with precision, and 2. any analysis of the data requires a thorough understanding of the methods used for the analysis, and from my reading the methods are often either unclear or flawed. So first, accuracy and precision. These are different and can be applied to any athletic endeavor where you are throwing an object at a target, from dartboards to pitching to football. These are different as the dartboard analogy shows: you can be all around the bullseye: you're accurate and not precise. And you can have each dart hit a specific point on the dartboard, but miles away from the intended target, and then you're precise but you have terrible accuracy.A number of people here tell me they're the same and that I make a distinction that is not worth making. But that is incorrect, and the pff study you cite even makes that clear, when they talk about trying to measure how often a QB hits a specific spot. That is precision, and to be clear when pff and others talk about this, what they really mean is that the best QB's, like say a Brees, are both highly accurate AND highly precise. I have said numerous time around here that Allen could stand to be more precise, or what the commonly used term for that in the NFL: be better at ball placement. Ball placement is not accuracy. Ball placement is putting the ball in a very specific spot, and to that extent I agree with the pff analysis to a degree. But that is not accuracy, and if you watched Allen especially in the last part of the season he was accurate; he put the ball in the catch radius on the vast majority of passes. Some were clunkers, true, and I acknowledged those when I posted my analysis of his last couple games when I did this months ago. So have others here. So then, why is Allen not more precise? Mechanics probably play a role to be sure. but also when you're running for your life it's harder to be precise and when your average length of pass is highest in the league (as shown in the pff study) it's going to affect your precision. Put another way: if you want to hit the bulls eye would you rather throw the dart from 2 feet away or 20? And the other thing to think about, which is one of my critiques of the pff study, is it very well could be that Allen was precise on some throws, but he threw to a spot where he expected the WR to be. There was one play with Clay that illustrates this. It was a crossing pattern, and the ball was a bit out front of Clay. Hit him in the hands and he dropped it. And so many here used that to say Allen is inaccurate. But what if he threw that ball EXACTLY where he wanted it, hit the exact spot he wanted to hit, and Clay just messed up being in the right spot. The flaw as I see it in the pff study is it assumes the receiver is in the exact spot he's supposed to be, and that any blame for being off a perfect spot is on the QB. I don't agree. And it will be interesting to see if Allen's ratings from pff increase just because he has a new receiving crew. I review a lot of scientific manuscripts in my job, and I reject about 90% of what I get because there are usually flaws in the Materials and Methods parts of the study, many of which involve statistics. So in looking at the pff stuff you cited, I find flaws in methodology. How many observers review each throw from each QB? Are they the seame What is the agreement between observers for a specific QB (i.e interobserver variation)? How reproducible is one observer's data (i.e. intra-observer variation)? When they talk about hitting the "perfect spot", who defines that as such? And based on what criteria? Those are all questions I have with respect to their data. Now, on to completion percentage. First, I don't really care what other QB's completion percentages are because completion percentage is not a measure of accuracy. I will point out the same thing to you that I have pointed out time and time again to folks. So many say he has to get to 60%, so if he throws an average of 30 passes a game that is 2.4 more completions a game. And if you look at the percentage drops he had, or the throwaways, there are easily those 2.4 throws a game that get him to the magical 60%. You and others will say that can apply to other QBs as well, and would also up their completion percentage, to which I say: So what. we are talking about Allen here and his performance; other QB performances don't matter. What matter s is his performance. And Allen's performance as far as completion percentage is affected by a number of things, some his fault and some not. He needs to take check downs more often; that alone would increase his completion percentage over the magical 60%. He needs WRs that get better separation and an O line that gives him more time to set up in the pocket. My qualitative assessment was that, in the latter part of the season, he was right there with passes when given time in the pocket. So when I said folks just vomit up stats without really thinking their way through them, the above is what I mean. Granted, I do this more because of my background, so I geek out over this stuff. And some of what I see in the pff stuff Is good and some I question. One thing I think we can all agree on is that Allen needs to continue to improve as he enters his second season. I personally want to see him make quicker decisions; as I say often for young QBs it's all about the game slowing down enough to make that easier. I'd like to see more of taking what offense s give him and taking the 5 yard pass rather than force it downfield. I think having Dorsey around will help him there, as will having guys like Beasley and a TE or two that can actually catch. And as he has acknowledged himself, Allen needs to be more precise, or as he puts it have better ball placement. There's a difference in completing a pass and having the receiver tackled right there, vs. having the receiver make a catch and have room to run because the ball is put maybe six inches farther outside, and having both Allen working on mechanics and having more experience PLUS having receivers that know how and when to get to their spot should help there. So as you said, please. Please read things with a more critical eye.

You are confusing accuracy with precision, which I have explained countless times around here. When you talk about a "perfect spot" that is being both highly accurate AND highly precise. Look at the dartboard analogy for further explanation. And that PFF thing has issues with it. It presupposes they know what the perfect spot is on any given throw. Plus Allen tended to throw downfield more which increases the size if the spot, assuming they know it. I am not a Kool Aid drinker; Allen needs to be more precise on the short passes and I have said so numerous times. You on the other hand seem to want to vomit up stats without critically analyzing methods used to obtain them and ignore guys around here that have put a ton of time in looking at each throw this kid made. The reason I like some of the data shown by our colleagues on this board is they used a consistent and to my mind more correct definition of accuracy.

Several folks on this board have looked at every pass from multiple games that Allen played in last year and shown that the inaccuracy thing is way overblown if not outright wrong. Yet you and others persist.

I put you in the same class!

Gunner is a gem