Dilger85
-
Posts
283 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Dilger85
-
-
13 minutes ago, DougDew said:
Funny thread. A few thoughts:
The person with real knowledge writes the internet article. Reading the article and researching stats is not knowledge. Knowing the circumstances under which each data point was created is. With real knowledge, a person doesn't need stats. Stats are used when you don't have knowledge about something, but desire to form an opinion about it anyway.
So, yes, Jared is right about that. I don't know if he really has real knowledge about Trestman, but neither does anybody else who looked it up on the internet a few minutes ago.
You like Jared are missing the point. The person writing the article still had to complete research for the article so that person wouldn't have that knowledge unless they researched it first. I cannot believe I am trying to explain this to people. The rest of your drivel is baseless and makes no sense.
-
6 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
Basically, it gets frustrating when you have to prove your work to people when you know you are right. That's the frustrating thing to me. Someone asks for a link or something. It's not so bad in football, baseball is where it's really horrible. I think I'm done with this thread though. I really have nothing more to say. The hire is what it is.
That is another assumption.
-
2 minutes ago, DougDew said:
You are correct. Stats are used to justify an opinion already formed. Knowing the circumstances under which each stat was created is real knowledge.
A RB avgs 4.1 yds per carry. Is that because of a good oline, a defense playing dime because of a QB threat, etc.
You are completely wrong. Using only the stats that back up your argument is confirmation bias, please do not equate the numbers with a human behavior. Numbers generally don't lie there has to be human manipulation involved.
The reasons you list for the RB averaging the yards per carry are issues that can be explained by the use of statistics as well. All of that would factor in to the judgement of the yards per carry of said running back.
-
1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:
My issue isn't people having facts, my issue is that certain posters get overinflated for being extremely intelligent, when in reality, they are just using the internet to tell their side of the debate. Most of us are probably pretty close to the same intelligence level in football with some disagreements here and there, but the internet can make a lot of people seem like geniuses if used right. Then others call others stupid for not doing research, when they didn't know anything about the subject in the first place. The internet can make anyone a genius if used right.
Could you make more assumptions? First you assume that no one that has responded to you knew that Trestman was an outstanding offensive coach in the NFL before he jumped to the CFL. Second you assume that every member on this board has the same intelligence level on football. You have no idea, stop assuming. No one has called you stupid during this entire discussion. I told you to do more research which you should. Increase your understanding and knowledge of a topic before you comment on something and you will find that your take will be better informed and taken to task less.
-
4 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
For me, I was always taught how bad plagarizing was, and I'm hesitant to look up someone else's work and post it as basically my own facts. It's just a force of habit from high school and college. For example, I don't want to look up a scouting report, basically copy the scouting report word for word as an argument for or against. I wouldn't know anything about that player, it's not my opinion. I feel I should say what I know, unless it's some exact stat like a rank or something similar.
It would help if you understood the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are facts they cannot be stolen. If you repeat that the temperature was 20 degrees today, you are not plagiarizing the weather man. Opinions are things like scouting reports which is the opinion of the analyst. How do you learn anything then? If you have a problem with people reading viewpoints about a player or completing research then how does someone acquire more knowledge with anything in life? How do you know what you know? Do you not see gaining knowledge and being taught things is exactly what research is except that you complete the learning process yourself? I am generally confused by your rant on researching a topic before you discuss it.
-
3 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
I didn't say that, but it makes things deceptive among the forum with who is smarter. Even Superman looks up the vast majority of his stats. If we compared our knowledge without internet aid, it'd be very close to even instead of him being the overwhelming smartest person on the forum.
Who doesn't look up stats from a third party? Do you memorize them? Generally, I try to have facts to back up my position on a certain topic. I tend to need to look things up and complete research in order to make a rational, well informed opinion about something. What is your issue with people having facts to back up opinions? For the record, I do remember Marc's stints with the 49ers and Raiders. He is a WCO coach and a very talented offensive mind. You see CFL and his time with the Bears and made an asinine assumption that anyone who comes in contact with him will be poisoned. I could have told you WITHOUT DOING RESEARCH that Trestman is/was a very well respected QB coach and offensive mind but as an adult I like to provide evidence to back up my claims.
-
34 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
I realize what he did in 83 in Miami and in 89 on the Browns, neither were HC jobs. He got some value out of Jake Plummer and did well with Rich Gannon, but as an OC. Funny thing is, you probably knew nothing about him and just looked up some info just to learn about him 5 mins ago. It's always copy/paste, click on an article. No one has any real knowledge, they just look it up and pretend too. Half the people on here would be lost if they were talking in public instead of on a computer. I may not do as much research, but at least I'm not fake where I pretend to know more than I do. What I talk about is what I 100% know.
Except you don't know anything, you are making assumptions. I knew about Marc mainly from San Francisco but also when you worked with Oakland under Gruden. Is Gruden a terrible coach that you would want nothing to do with? You are trying to connect dots that are not there. This hire isn't coming in to be the HC so why are you obsessing over his mentor's HC record? Look at Marc's offensive past and you will see that one of his 49er offenses lead the league in offense, he helped Rich Gannon and Jake Plummer have career years and then he helped SCOTT MITCHELL through for over 3700 yards. I like learning more about things, that is why I research topics before I spout of my uninformed opinion. Please define "real knowledge".
-
1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:
Oh no, if I open up, I will never shut up. Trestman is a bum as a coach at the NFL level. His CFL ideas didn't work, and I don't want anyone associated with him coming on board. That's how I feel. Don't want Luck associated with this garbage. This really grinds my gears Shafty.
You do realize that he didn't start in the CFL, right?
-
15 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
When you only have one stint in the NFL, that's what you get judged on, like it or not. You can judge this hire based on what fits your narrative, but Marcus Brady learned from someone that was an absolute failure at the NFL Level, and those are the facts. CFL isn't NFL, it's close by 2/3, but no cigar.
Would you please start doing more research on these coaches before reacting. Marc has been a very highly thought of and respected offensive innovator in the league since the early 90s. His one shot at HC went horribly but he knows offense. I would not have any reservations about hiring an offensive coach that has worked with him before. Marc has a reputation for doing wonders with quarterbacks and there is proof to back that up throughout his career.
-
8 minutes ago, BProland85 said:
I'm hoping this defense resembles the Seattle Cover 3 defense more so than the Dungy Tampa 2 Defense. With Eberflus, I've heard he was implementing some of Seattle's schemes so hopefully thats where they're going. We already have our elite cover safety in Hooker. And I think both Melvin and Wilson fit the outside press corner that fits that style of defense.
This will be more in line with what they will be running. Eberflus ran the coverage in Dallas and he did run a lot of Cover 3. I do believe that we will see a mixture of the two philosophies on D.
-
47 minutes ago, GoPats said:
That last statement is perfect. Just perfect.
So, just because an allegation is unfounded and unproven, it doesn't mean the Patriots didn't do it?
Yes, also means that they should not be punished for it and they weren't.
lmao.
Do you have any idea how messed up that statement is? Why because the Pats are such a trustworthy franchise that has never been caught bending or breaking the rules?
I hope you're never on jury duty if I have to go to trial...
I get that you are a Pats fan and trying to defend your organization, but please get off your high horse. "we didn't cheat that time, honest". Give me a break, the Pats are a great team and have been for a long time but don't try to make it sound inconceivable that they broke the rules more than they have been caught that is just not logical. Logic would lead one to believe that the taping of signals and practices like that were common during that particular time frame unless the Pats just happened to get caught the first time out.
-
With that particular instance, it just seemed like frustration boiling over. The Chiefs were losing and had been for several games if memory serves, and a flag had just been thrown that gave the Jets another chance and extending the lead. Don't get me wrong, what he did was unacceptable and was fined by the league and suspending by the team but that incident would not keep me from acquiring him at all. If he was suspended for missing meetings due to drinking or staying out all night then that might be a different story. I see that instance as a player who was frustrated and reacted. I would definitely give up a 3rd for him and maybe even a second.
-
I think the defense will be closer to what Seattle runs especially in coverage.
-
1 minute ago, GoPats said:
Do you understand what it takes to have a major newspaper print a retraction?
Just asking you an honest question here.
No, but I would imagine that conflicting or unconfirmed information contributes to the retraction. I would make the assumption that they shouldn't have ran the story in the first place as they might not have had enough confirmed evidence.
The point still stands though, just because they didn't get caught doesn't mean they didn't do it.
-
3 hours ago, GoPats said:
One of the problems with the media is that even false stories, retracted stories, etc... get legs sometimes. The Patriots never taped another team's walk-through as part of "Spygate."
Says Goodell, not a great track record. What's Walsh going to say, "I know you didn't catch us red-handed like you did with the Jets, but we did it to other teams also". Didn't the evidence get destroyed in that case without anyone other than Goodell and the Pats knowing what was on the tapes? Not being caught is not the same as being not guilty.
-
14 minutes ago, JColts72 said:
Sports show TV just plain sucks with who could be the loudest and who could be the biggest jerk. This goes for ESPN, NFL Network, Pre-Game Shows before Kickoff on Fox/CBS. I wait until about one minute before kickoff to watch a game now.
Yep, I haven't watch a pre-game show for any sport in years.
-
1 hour ago, eseae said:
no, its called playing within the rules.
Â
is a flea flicker bad sportsmenship because you fool the d backs into thinking a run is coming, then flip the ball back to the QB for a long pass?
Â
at the time it happened, it was COMPLETELY legal. it still is. and will be. nothing unsporting or unethical about it.
Â
if you think there is, then we should ban flea flickers, end arounds, multiple reverses, any trick or gadget play.
I question if you know what that word even means if you think that there was nothing wrong ethically with this entire situation. McDaniels agrees to become coach, hammers out details of a contract, starts hiring assistant coaches, continues to recruit additional assistants and then decides that he would rather stay with the Pats. He created a difficult situation by not being up front and honest and compounded it by walking away from his commitment. He is an unethical *. His agent agrees as he fired him over this whole mess.
-
2 hours ago, eseae said:
read the article, the lawyer that wrote it shoots down everything you just said. and he is espn's legal expert, and we all trust the espn guys since they broke deflategate, right?
The article was SI not ESPN, didn't you post it?
-
1 hour ago, eseae said:
that guy is a well known lawyer who has taught at many schools. where you teach dosent change what the law is.
Â
the point of this post was provide an answer to the tons of questions about what the colts could do legally, so we could all move on. Now we know, nothing. lets just hope the future is better than the last few years.
First, he was giving his legal opinion. It was definitely based on fact, but his legal opinion could very well be swayed by his location and his views on the situation. Throughout the article he had a few items and particulars incorrect according to multiple reports. I am sure that you can find differing opinions on the matter. This person is not the sole authority, since this would be a civil case there are many different avenues to explore if you wanted. In other words, just because this guy says that the Colts have no recourse doesn't necessarily make it so which is why I made the joke.
-
15 minutes ago, Indeee said:
the argument is HOF coach. Dungy without a QB like manning would squeak into the wildcard round every year... based on his coaching/record... My point was that is not HOF pedigree for a coach
But yet he is in the HOF, interesting that you could make that assumption. How good is Bill without Brady?
-
10 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
We'll see what happens soon when we hire a coach. Just hoping we don't get Leslie Frazier at this point.
That we can agree on
-
1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:
I did admit I had no real knowledge of campbell. So at least i was honest. That I was judging on other teams prespectives of him because he was a new name to him. I thought we were getting McDaniels so I got lazy on looking at coaches.
Understandable but I truly trust Ballard but only time will tell if he makes the right choice. Pederson was phillys third choice. There are still quality coaches available just have to find them.
-
2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
That makes me feel a bit better then. Wasn't aware of that. I hope we get Reich. He's head and shoulders the best guy left IMO then.
You didn’t know that but chalked him up to garbage and the immediately changed your mind. The Parcells connection is with Campbell and those have good results.
-
4 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
Nagy is part of the Andy Reid coaching tree. They have a good history generally, and I believe he did a good job on the Chiefs. He's someone I'd trust without much experience that is relatively young. Vrabel seems like a mature guy that played football and won that would command respect. He is also young, but he did well with the Texans, and he is someone I'd trust that has a competitive personality.
I don't know how much Reich had to do with that Eagles team. I thought Pederson was responsible for most of it. I'd just be cautious with Reich right now. He's my choice of the 3 guys currently, but I'm not real confident in him.
Your reasons could literally almost be applied word for word for Reich and Campbell
Report: Toronto Argos' OC Marcus Brady joining the Colts staff
in Colts Football
Posted
So why not do the same with your opinions of a coaching hire? You do research to make a more informed decision, correct? That is the point that I was trying to make with you through our entire discussion which is research a topic before forming an opinion.