oldmanfan

You don't understand the concept. Or don't want to understand the concept.

As a self proclaimed holistic and objective observer, you may want to look back in history as to the eventual impact of big name free agent signings on a team's overall performance. You may be surprised. The job of a GM is to look for ways to upgrade his team. They brought in two WRs that are upgrades to the position vs. last season. Brown takes essentially Benjamin's old job, Beasley takes what was essentially a non-filled spot. Morse upgrades the C spot, they brought in two tackles one of which starts unless they draft one day 1 or two, two at G that should upgrade Miller and Ducasses and give competition to Teller, a TE that upgrades over Clay, an All Pro KR that upgrades that spot plus a good gunner for special teams, and two CBS for depth to upgrade there. At some point people are going to have to listen to Beane and believe what he says. He has said you look to FA to fill holes and the draft to get the best guys you can. That is what he has done and is doing. Now, if you want to give the all too trite "I'll believe it when I see it", or "show me the baby" stuff go ahead. Of course we have to see how it works out. Duh. As for contract length, it is also clear Beane values cap space. He has a lot of it next year, some remaining this year. By signing this crop of FAs to manageable short contracts he gives himself flexibility to extend guys that he knows are integral ( like a Hyde and Poyer), and he can extend any of his FAs that merit the extension and let others walk after a year of service. Pretty astute approach.

Depth is a good thing. Competition for positions is a good thing.

Look at the history of his posts. It's sad. Every single person on this board knows that the signings etc. donevthis offseason all have to show it on the field next year. That is a given. It is reasonable when you look at the signings to think that the front office has a plan they are executing, and that the signings should help. For example the special teams were bad, and they changed coaches, brought in an All Pro returner and a really good gunner. The O line was bad and they have brought in a number of individuals to upgrade. They needed receivers and brought in a good outside guy and good slot guy. Yes, time will tell but they did what they said they'd do, identify areas to fill in with FAs and fill them. Soory but SoTier is like the kid that gets a pony for Christmas and complains because it will give him manure. He is obsessed with claiming all these moves are bacause the team wants $$ vs. wins. He fails to recognize time after time that ownership and team management has changed, and just spins every single thing done in a negative fashion. And that's just sad if you claim to be a fan. Right. No one else is sick of losing. You're just sad.

That's disappointing. Continually and incessantly looking for negatives of teams you supposedly root for is truly sad

Is Sullivan semi-retired and the Niagara thing just something to add to his retirement income? Is he not able to find another position with a bigger paper or on line site? Some here defended him a lot as being a really good, well respected columnist. I would think a guy with such supposed talent would have a bigger gig than the Niagara Gazette.

I find it sad that a fan can be so incessantly negative

Yes. You look at their diagrams and they imply that unless you hit a guy right in the numbers every pass you're inaccurate. Hitting the same spot continually is precision, not accuracy. Look back and you'll see the classic dartboard diagrams explaining the difference between the two. Bottom line is great QBs are highly accurate and highly precise. Allen needs to be more precise, and on short balls I'd say both.

If you go back through the thread, which I know is asking a lot, you'll see why this data is faulty. They confuse accuracy with precision.

Hope he prospers in his new career.

I don't think you get it. The only thing to analyze is whether the guys brought in represent improvements. And if you don't think the guys they've brought in are better it's because you don't want to.

They have a plan. They're executing the plan. Time will tell how successful they'll be, but there certainly seems to be some well thought out work here. Refreshing to see the HC and GM working in synch.

Hope you're right.

I agree. That is why these simplistic "he's inaccurate" statements are lazy IMHO. I used the Clay as an example, but without asking Allen I can't know for sure if he threw it right where he wanted.

Didn't think they needed help at safety. But he's a big special teams guy too. You look at what's going on and you start to think the new coaches for ST and OL have looked at a lot of film and decided the incumbents stink.

Just stop with the nonsense. I just said above that the kid has a ways to go. Which I've said consistently. The OP talked about how Allen's accuracy is similar to other young QBs. He did so because so many claimed he was worse, based primarily on completion percentage which is a false equivalency. I understand perfectly.

I wanted Rosen. Like Allen now more based on last year. But Rosen will be a good QB in the league.

Not whitewashing, identifying correctly. He like most young QBs has to learn to read defenses, has to learn to take the easy shorter completion. Needs a little more touch on short throws. But saying he's inaccurate is just lazy as shown by the OP.

Agree. They also brought in two tackles though. If they draft a T day 1or 2 Dawkins will have a very direct message sent. And if I'm Teller I wouldn't sign a long term rental on my condo.

I don't think he cherry picked, he did a ton of work on a lot of QBs. Allen has work to do for sure, just that the accuracy stuff is overblown. Back to the game.

When this new line coach came in he and Daboll must have concluded none of the returnees were worth squat. I'm starting to wonder if Dawkins has a job. They brought in two tackles and if they draft one he's probably out too.

No it hasn't and now you're just being dumb. This thread was stated by an individual who did an exhaustive analysis of several young QBs, with the data indicating the supposed accuracy issues Allen has are overblown. We also discussed at length accuracy and precision, and discussed at length why completion percentage is not really an indicator of accuracy. Go back through the thread and look at the dartboard diagrams that show what accuracy means. You can only define accuracy by how close a given throw is to the target. Ergo, if you don't know the exact target you can't really define how accurate a throw is. That is basic statistics and if you want to just ignore that it's your problem. An example would be a throw over the middle Allen made to Clay. Clay had to reach for the ball and it was incomplete. The uneducated would say Allen was inaccurate. But Clay immediately got up and gestured it was on him, I.e. Allen put it right where he wanted it but Clay didn't get to the spot. So again, do you want to have a serious discussion, or be silly? Either way I'll be watching UB so it'll be a while. Maybe you can spend time on your beloved Chiefs site for a while.

Now you're being silly. Peterman threw a ton of picks. Do you want to have a real discussion about this or resort to silliness?

The data you show does not really address the question. All you're doing is what others do: trying to use completion percentage to conflate with accuracy. There have been lengthy discussions about this in the thread; I encourage you to read them if you haven't. Ultimately to gauge accuracy in any athletic endeavor, whether a football, basketball, bowling ball, golf ball, the only person who truly knows exactly what his target is is the one with the ball in his hands. Without that knowledge you can't really say for sure how accurate a single throw, etc. is.

Either have all plays potentially reviewable or get rid of it altogether and accept bad calls are part of the game. I'd go with the latter myself, but trying to parse it out this way makes it ridiculous.