Warhawk
-
Posts
1,020 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Warhawk
-
-
Poor Cleveland. :bag:
-
Found this on another team forum.
http://fanspeak.com/ontheclock/
My first time through I ended up with:
2nd: C Travis Swanson (Arkansas)
3rd: WR Brandon Coleman (Rutgers)
5th: S Jonathan Dowling (Western Kentucky)
6th: RB/WR/KR Dri Archer (Kent State)
7th: CB Bennett Jackson (Notre Dame)
Site says it updates on Tuesdays.
-
I don't give a crap about Gronk who cares? I also don't care about lateral passes vs TDs that's semantics with no precedence whatsoever. I care about 1 game in this case: The Broncos vs the Raiders. This isn't an NFL statistical documentation course for college credit.
You should care about Gronk because it's a similar situation. Otherwise you're just arguing that Manning should be treated differently from everyone else just because he's Peyton Manning.
-
Peyton might be stripped of this achievement through no fault of his own...Tell me Warhawk if you were 18 would you capitulate so easily? The issue here is no recourse & the window in which the incident occurred plain & simple.
You're still not addressing the Gronkowski example cited above, which is largely similar. Just because this time it's likely to happen to Peyton Manning doesn't mean that we should drop the usual protocol just so that Manning's feelings aren't hurt.
And like I said, he can't be stripped of the achievement if he never actually attained that achievement, and if that's a lateral (and it looks pretty clear that it is), he didn't. Those are rushing yards, not passing yards.
-
Your election analogy is irrelevant. Did I say anything about a recount? No, I did not. Cite the infraction in the game window or act as though the infraction or statistical anomaly ever took place.
Issuing fines is the only retro active penalty I would accept days after the fact.
Stop calling it an infraction. It's NOT an infraction - there's no penalty, it's just changing the yardage from passing yardage to rushing yardage to reflect what actually happened on the field. See the above reference example involving Gronkowski for comparison. This is the same thing. And bringing up fines, for god knows what reason, is way more irrelevant than anything I've said.
This is NOT a disciplinary incident. It's purely a record-keeping formality. The play was a rushing play, since the pass did not go in a forward direction. It should be recorded as such, same as if the wrong player was credited for a tackle or a sack on a given play.
-
The Green Bay Packers would have actually intercepted that Seahawks pass too last season TLJ. Did the League do that? Sadly no.
That's actually a completely different issue. Statistics that are adjusted are things like who make a tackle or a sack, or how much yardage was gained on a play as it will be reflected in the books, or whether a play was a pass or a lateral (as in this case). All those things don't affect the course of play, since the tackle was still made, or the first down was picked up (or wasn't), or the yardage was gained anyway (just as a rush instead of a pass).
-
If someone is about to take something away from you, a plateau that very few people reach in their occupation with no recourse at your disposal after the fact, would you be please Warhawk with no opportunity to resolve the matter? I highly doubt it sir.
And if you take the record away from Brees and give it to Manning even though Manning did not technically earn it, that's just fine and dandy?
The statistics are often adjusted to be as accurate as possible according to the rules of the game. According to the rules of the game, Peyton Manning did not accumulate enough passing yards to break Brees' record.
If a close election is recounted and the other candidate wins, that does not mean that the first candidate had the victory "taken" from him. He either won, or he didn't. Manning either broke the record, or he didn't. Unfortunately, he didn't.
-
You are missing the point. The infraction itself is not the issue, but rather when it is acknowledged publicly & giving the QB is question the necessary time to overcome the circumstance within the window of the game when the record may or may not be broken. That's the reason why I mentioned the HD cameras & fiber optics technology.
There's no "infraction" here. Laterals aren't a penalty or anything like that.
-
Again my central thesis is this: If you fail to catch the discrepancy during the game, then you shouldn't be able to retroactively strip any QB of their single season passing title. Popularity of any athlete is secondary to me.
But why should that be any different than correcting any other inaccuracy in statkeeping? If the same play happened with Andrew Luck and Griff Whalen last week, it would have been changed to a lateral + rush attempt. In keeping statistics, shouldn't the NFL and Elias strive for the most accuracy possible, period, rather than the most accuracy possible without making anyone feel bad? I mean, how trustworthy and reliable are the official NFL statistics if they fudge the numbers sometimes in order to give the players they like records that weren't earned?
-
Then why the hades does the NFL compile & keep track of so much statistical material to determine what players get enshrined in Canton, Ohio for?
Records get set, cataloged, & put down for posterity all the time. No, it isn't irrelevant.
It's irrelevant because you shouldn't correct some statistics to be more accurate after a game is over but not others solely based on how good you think a storyline is.
-
I'm only asking because I don't know: If the League does strip Peyton Manning of the 2013 single season passing record, is there an asterisk or footnote in the Canton NFL record books at least claiming that 18 held the record for 24 hours at least?
Do suits show up wearing dark shades & say sign this document & never speak of this controversy again like a non-disclosure binding law agreement like Keyser Söze ["The Usual Suspects" film joke] "Poof! The record is gone...
This is silly.
It's a lateral. It should count as rushing yardage for Decker. They make adjustments to the statistics all the time to make sure they're accurate. The statistics that are kept in real time have no temporal momentum. If they change the stats later to correct a stat-keeping error, the old statistic doesn't retain any quality of legitimacy. Nobody is being penalized, it's just a function of accurate statistical record-keeping. That such an adjustment makes the difference in whether a player breaks a historical record shouldn't make a difference.
Plus, the idea that the league should just give Manning the record because of how popular Manning is is a bit absurd.
-
Derek Carr, if only for the entertainment value that the Texans' boards would provide when the pick is announced.
-
Here it is in Gif form:
http://gfycat.com/AjarClosedAmericanbulldog
You can also slow down the gif if you hover over over the gif and press the (-) that appears under it
Clearly a lateral.
-
A Schiano man can't be fired. He just reassigns himself to a pseudo-lateral position.
-
That was fairly inevitable.
-
Sure. But as the first pick he should have had this season IMO. The 18 picks last year were awful as well as the fumbles. He is def. a QB that learns from his mistakes and that will serve him well this season and beyond but all the great QBs have that pedigree or at least should.
Well, he did have quite a few attempts. 2.9% isn't great these days, but he was pretty much at the same level as Brees, Romo, Dalton, Eli, and Rivers were last year. Not exactly banner years by some of those guys, but it's not like Luck, especially since he was a rookie, was notably awful. In any case, Luck's career interception percentage now is better than guys like Brees, Manning, Rivers, Ryan, Flacco, and Romo, and you'd think those guys have played long enough for the number to go down.
Actually, since we're comparing Luck and Manning, it's worth noting that Luck's interception percentage this year was lower than every single year of Manning's career except one - which also happened to be this year.
-
The actual question at hand, in which I raised issue with and you and another poster interjected, was if Peyton's better ratio meant Luck didn't actually throw less picks.
Over the course of the season? Of course not. I just don't understand why you're arguing that Luck throwing 9 interceptions in 100 less attempts than Manning is a plus for Luck.
-
Oh yeah! Well, how does his fumble percentage match up to Peyton's?
'Cause that seems to be all that's important in this thread.
Very well actually, if you really want the answer to the question. Best way to figure fumble percentage for a QB would probably be sacks+rush attempts (basically, plays where you have the opportunity to fumble). Ignoring whether fumbles are lost, since that can be rather random (and also note this is only through 15 games, so not counting what happened this Sunday), Manning has fumbled the ball on 20.41% of such plays this year (10 fumbles on 32 rush attempts + 17 sacks), while Luck has fumbled the ball on 5.43% of such plays this year (5 fumbles on 61 rush attempts and 31 sacks).
-
How many times have we seen Brady do dinky passes horizontally rather than down the field? That boosts his attempts without really risking an interception. So maybe percentage isn't the best measure.
The question isn't whether interception percentage is the best measure of a QB in general, but whether it's a better measure than just the number of interceptions in the abstract. Which it is. If you're looking for a stat that's just a better measure of a QB... try passer rating. Because INT% is incorporated in it (along with TD%, YPA, and Completion %).
Besides, the only way your comment about Brady is relevant is if you want to make the argument that Manning has been dinking and dunking all year and has boosted his attempts in doing so. Good luck with that.
-
Well, last Super Bowl odds I saw had KC at 25/1 and Indy at 33/1, so apparently KC is a better team, and probably matches up better with, say, Denver.
-
Surprised we're favored at all, the only team with worse Super Bowl odds than us, last I checked, is San Diego.
-
how can you retain a staff before a coach is even hired?
By implementing an organizational structure designed by M.C. Escher.
-
Seriously, how do you let someone get that open, that deep?
-
FYI, scuttlebutt on Browns forums is Josh McDaniels.
This is why Cleveland can't have nice things. :bag:
Tickets for Saturdays playoff game sold out?
in Colts Football
Posted
FWIW, Green Bay and Cincy have not sold out either.