supremecoltsfan300
-
Posts
1,362 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by supremecoltsfan300
-
-
caldwell was one of the worst nfl coaches i've seen. It's really amazing we almost won a sb with him as our head coach.....although we lost that sb in large part to him, as we could not cover for his mistakes anymore because we didnt play flawless football. He was a bad coach, plain and simple. I dont know how people stating the obvious about him is a personal attack on him. For his coaching career as a hc, Caldwell was bad. As far as I know, as a person he was a good guy. Terrell Owens for most of his playing career was a beast on the field. As a person during those years, TO was a bad person (im sure we could use another term, but the mods probably wouldnt like that so we wont
)Caldwell's performance as a hc did not cut it. He was similar to dungy in ways (I dont think dungy was always a great coach, he had moments though and I'll love him for when he had them), but imo overall as a coach he doesnt come close to being a dungy let alone a BB.
Back on topic: 2012 Manning > 2012 Luck
-
The only conclusive trend is that teams play better at home and qbs play better at home as well. Everything else has too many varaiables and a small sample size where the sample can easily be skewed by an outlier or too. And while I do like quarterback rating that is not a perfect measurement of quarterback performance. Tds, Ints have to be considered as well (independently of the rating). Small sample sizes have brought you kevin kolb and matt flynn (well that hasnt officially been a bust yet but give it a year) as massively overpaid starters. Even nfl teams fall victim to believing in small samples.
-
the best way i can put it is like this:
say you were evaluating the accuracy of a clock:
this clock is broken and it always reads 12:00
You check the accuracy of the clock three times, one at 11:00, one at 12:00, one at 1:00.
You would say that based on your recordings, the clock was accurate 33% of the time.
Now had you done that accuracy check every hour starting at 9:00 and ending at 3:00, the clock would only be accurate (1/7)% much lower than 33%.
Just trying to say that the small sample size can really be affected by a one time outlier, giving way to wrong conclusions.
-
Yes, the sample size is small, but the overwhelming majority of QBs play better indoors, small sample size or not. If you have 50 data points of small sample sizes, and 45 of them go one way and the other 5 go the other, you can draw a conclusion from that.
In any case, you're looking at the data that shows that almost every QB of note has a better rating indoors. If you still think that Manning is the only guy in the NFL who doesn't play better outdoors, I can't really help you. The statistics overwhelmingly say otherwise.
The sample size of 10 games is not conclusive....
again the qbs who have way better stats indoors vs outdoors play their home games indoors. I'm just saying that outside of a game where the weather is a diaster, there is no noticeable difference in qb A's performance in outdoor games (that are not home games) vs qb A's perfomance in indoor games (that are not home games). If you just look at afc qbs who play outdoors for their home games, their stats indoors has a very small sample size and that sample size is highly vulnerable to being distorted because 20-40% of those indoor games were played against a poor Colts D. (not trying to beat up on the colts d, just using it as an example). so if they were able to do great against that colts d in that one game or two, and then the rest of the indoor games they performed like how they do on average in outdoor games, it would make the stats show a considerable difference in the indoor vs outdoor stats b/c the sample size is so small.
-
You're ignoring all the road outdoors games they play. Yahoo Sports has split stats for players. I'm not making this stuff up, check it yourself. Virtually all QBs have better indoor QB ratings than outdoor ones.
Brady has a 103.1 rating indoors, 95.8 outdoors. Rodgers is 111.3 / 102.4.
The sample size is ridiculously small for some of these guys....rodgers has 13, brady has just 14 over all these years just wow.........
rodgers is explainable, the games he has played in indoors have generally been pretty poor defensive teams. He does have great numbers though, but again the size is small. However brady, while i agree that his rating is higher (actually im not agreeing what you're saying is fact) the actual numbers imo favor the outdoor stats. td to int ratio is considerably better indoors than outdoors. again it's a small sample size and some of those games indoors were against the colts who i think we can agree had a pretty horrible pass defense (and predictable to say the least), inflating some of those numbers.
And remember that outdoor games can have horrible weather like a blizzard, where a qb might peform absolutely terribly and that could drastically affect his stats (ex., he throws 6 picks, 0 tds). that becomes more like an outlier messing up the distribution.
Outdoor games do no usually have horrible weather. But when they do, it can distort the data.
The small sample size makes it really hard to draw anything conclusive about the effect indoor/outdoor has outside of whether its the homefield advantage or not.
-
thanks for posting. I think that supports my argument pretty well. And again, there were quite a few outdoor, cold temperature games where manning didnt play the whole game because they had everything locked up already.
-
I didn't say "Manning can't play outdoors." Almost all QBs play about 10 QB rating points better indoors than they do outdoors, Manning included. Same with Rodgers, Brady, Brees, Romo, Eli, and Roethlisberger, and with the exception of Brees and Romo those are all QBs who play outdoors at home. Only exception I found looking up QBs here was Rivers, and his indoor stats is a pretty small sample size. So, no, Manning's rating outdoors probably wouldn't be higher if he played outdoors at home.
EDIT: Also holds true for McNabb, Palmer, Favre.
Hasselbeck is a bit of an anomaly in that he's only 4 or so points better indoors than outdoors, rather than the usual 8-12. Same with McNair at only about 2.5 points better indoors.
This is just not true. an actual source with the stats to back it up would go a l ong way to supporting your point. Just looking at two of the qbs you mentioned who play outdoors, brady and rodgers have much better home numbers than road numbers. those home numbers are all outdoor numbers.
-
No need to try and justify your opinion by undermining another's accomplishments. That alone is telling.
I knew you'd say Peyton Manning.
I only asked because you make a statement asking how if Brady is such a master, how could he possibly lose to the same team 3 times in a row. Well...you think the Peyton Manning is the best quarterback of the last decade, and I'm fairly certain you would also make a case for him being one of, if not the, best of all time. So if Peyton is such a master, shouldnt he have figured out, to use your terminology, how to beat the Patriots when they beat him- what was it...6 times in a row a few years ago?
Not responding to your whole discussion with lucky because I havent read it all, however, peyton did figure out how to beat the pats. A few years ago is not accurate....they beat him all those times in a row about a decade ago, with the last lost in the row occuring in 2004, 8 years ago. There were many factors involved in the losses, including the usual phsycial dominance of the colt receivers by the patriot cb. BB and romeo also did outsmart peyton during those years, but it wasnt just him that was getting outplayed. Peyton didnt have a great mind like BB with him to help solve the defense like brady has had.
-
Uh, you debunked yourself. :clap:
lol no i didnt. Manning's numbers outdoors are not bad. they are good just not as good as his numbers indoors because many of those are home games. therefore, one would look for manning to have better numbers outdoors than indoors this year because that's where his homegames are. There are exceptions to this, but traditionally qbs perform better wherever their homefield is.
-
FWIW, Manning is playing outdoors in Denver, so Luck has an edge right off the bat if we're just comparing stats.
Manning not being able to play well outdoors is a myth......He has better numbers indoors because that's where he played most of his games. At least half his games were indoors because he played in a dome. Therefore, if most of those indoor games were at home, and qbs almost always perform better at home, he would have better numbers than in outdoor games which would be on the road. His numbers in outdoor games are not bad, they are just not as good as his phenomenal numbers indoors (which were mostly home games).
-
Thank you for making me picture Peyton's wobbly balls.
Sorry vance. Should I find one of Schaub's to get that image out of your mind?
-
Good topic Chad. It might be a bit premature, but that's okay..> it's a message board. It's for discussions.
I'm going to take a different approach than many will on this topic..
*Week 11
Sun. Nov. 18
Baltimore Ravens at Pittsburgh Steelers Unless one of these two teams have their seasons fall apart early I doubt this game will be flexed out of Sunday night.
**Week 12
Thurs. Nov. 22
New England Patriots at New York Jets I think same thing could be said for this one.
*Week 12
Sun. Nov. 25
Green Bay Packers at New York Giants Ditto
*Week 13
Sun. Dec. 2
Philadelphia Eagles at Dallas Cowboys Same here for the most part.
*Week 14
Sun. Dec. 9
Detroit Lions at Green Bay Packers See Week 11
*Week 15
Sun. Dec. 16
San Francisco 49ers at New England Patriots See week 14
*Week 16
Sun. Dec. 23
San Diego Chargers at New York Jets
*Week 17
Sun. Dec. 30
TBA
Week 17 is obviously open for discussion.
Week 16 & 13 would be the most likely games to be flexed out and even then that is not very likely.
Week 13 @ Detroit. Could be an attractive game.
Week 16 @ Kansas City
Week 17 vs. Houston The only way I see this one flexed is if it's for the AFC South title, or either team is in line with a win & in vs. Loser goes home and that there isn't a head to head match up that is for a division title.
Week 11 @ New England
Week 12 Buffalo
Week 14 Tennessee
Week 15 @Houston
All things considered I'm not sure the Colts will be in line to have a game flexed this season.
Your different approach perfectly analyzed the likelihood of this happening. Thanks
My analysis: Week 13, they'll probably want to keep the nfc east match-up since both are huge rating markets.
If I had to bet week 16 of existing games would be the best bet, because jets vs chargers doesnt have the same rivalry as other games, although rivers has choked against the jets several times in recent years. However indy vs kc isnt a sexy matchup.
Week 17 would be sexy if the division was on the line like FJC said, however I think we can all agree that is doubtful. However, that would be a good primetime game to end the year if that was the case.
-
Was Brady considered elite when the Pats won the SB in 2001? Was Eli considered a top QB in 2007 when they won it all? Was Ben considered a top QB in 2005?
We were a few miscues away from Alex Smith and Joe Flacco in the SB this past season.
Yet those miscues didnt happen. Atm, elite qbs win sbs. I still believe there can be a rare carry by an amazing defense for a ring but that is going to happen less and less imo. I think there are a few qbs who have the potential to be elite but none of them are in the afc atm.
-
While this is true, Manning's passes just were not the same. A couple of passes were just flat out wobbly. He still put the ball where it needed to be but right now, I don't think he has the velocity needed to go deep. With that said, he very well could still be building up arm strength. Like I said in another thread, right now its ok that he may still be getting stronger, but if he is still throwing wobbly passes come mid season, I would be worried if I was a Bronco's fan.
lol. Manning always throws wobbly balls. Accurate Wobbly balls are his trademark. In his prime that's what most of his td passes were. Again, the wobble has to do with touch. I honestly dont know how he does it, but he is able to make it so that wobbly ball is where it should and needs to be.
-
Peyton's arm strength has decreased. If you watched that Broncos vs Bears game.... a few of those passes were "Slow". Even the commentators pointed out that the "Zip" Peyton usually puts on a ball wasn't there. Maybe it was because it was his 1st game after so long, maybe it wasn't
it's all about putting the right touch on it. If a guy is open like decker was on the left side, you don't throw with a lot of velocity. That makes it liker the pass will be inaccurate or harder to catch. Just because you can throw 100 mph (an exaggeration) doesnt mean you always should. sometimes the best pass in a situation can be at say 60 mph.
-
That's beyond ridiculous to suggest that........Luck may have a good season, but he's not gonna be better than a 4 time mvp veteran statistically.
-
Is Vick truly an elite QB you think? I see Rogers,Brees, Eli, or even Cutler teams rep the NFC.
He isn't but that doesnt mean he cant get to the SB. The elite QBs win SBs, the very good qbs dont make it that far or lose the SB. Eagles have a very good team this year and unless major injuries strike will do very well.
-
The best 6 qbs in the league right now have won SBs. All the rest havent. Cassel is far from being in that elite group, and therefore the Chiefs arent winning anything. Their team is highly talented but Cassel will be their downfall. Afc is a lock every year, it'll be Ben, Brady, or Peyton representing the Afc. Nfc has a lot of teams that could make it all depending on match-ups. I think this is the Eagles year and they'll lose in the SB to the Broncos
-
Denver over Philadelphia
-
In the demo, cpu defenses seemed a lot better. On deep balls, unless my wr was wide open, I kept getting picked off. And the Redzone fade route was almost impossible to pull off. Seems more challenging this time around. Rg3 was not amazing imo, Had a couple good runs but nothing amazing.
-
http://www.nfl.com/n...cago-bears-fall
In these power rankings you can see obvious flaws, such as:
- Colts emblem at #10 next to the 'Broncos" team name
- 'Tebow' next to the Jets emblem INSTEAD of 'Jets'
- No emblem for Steelers, Bucs OR Colts.
- Eagles emblem next to the Bills team name
- Broncos emblem next to the Cardinals team name
- Saints emblem next to the Rams team name
That must be some goooooooood cheeba!
It looked fine to me. The Tebow thing was intentional. The author that did the rankings call the Jets that now (dumb/pointless imo).
-
Good post....
My guess is.... whoever gets the 1st pick, if they don't need a QB, they'll hope that two teams picking relatively high both need a QB, and get into a bidding war for the right to the 1st overall pick. So, the top team trades down, gets the player they want, and picks up added draft choices along the way.
Just a guess.... but seems reasonable. But thanks for sending the thread in that direction... some good ideas there...
I can see the RG3 scenario playing out again for Barkley this year (except 1st overall k=like you said). And who knows what qb will light it up in college this year and garner attention (no one saw newton as #1 or even rg3 #2 the year before)? Just seems like a lot of solid qb play atm in the league (and exceptional play by the elite 6) that won't result in SB rings but can get wins.
-
And here are the top QB's coming out... 3 seniors, 1 jr who all would project as 1st rounders right now. Others may become 1st rounders by next spring.
Seniors:
M. Barkley USC
T. Wilson Ark
L. Jones Okla
L. Thomas Virg. Tech.
Some of these guys could play their way out of the 1st round. Or, someone like Thomas might decide not to come out early.
You just never know. But, as of today, these would be the top-4, I think...
I think due to the lack of teams needing starters we'll see a decline in qbs being chosen in the first round (especially high in the first round). I really only see Barkley as a lock for a high 1st round pick the other guys I can see going late first round pick or somewhere in the second. The first overall pick in this years draft imo has a chance to not be a qb, something we haven't seen recently
-
Don't forget the Jets. Denver will in a few years depending on how Brock develops. Same could be said for Cleveland and Weeden. I'm not sold (though I think the potential is there) for Tannehill and I'm really not sold on Gabbert. San Fran and Seattle could both use an upgrade, though with Seattle it is still yet to be determined.
I really think the Jets are married to Sanchez. A divorce might happen this year but I just dont think it will. I expect Peyton to play four more years at least so Denver is far off (at least as far off as the Pats going hard for brady's replacement) and Os looks good anyway. Cleveland imo almost has to stick with Weeden for a bit since they used such a high draft pick on him. Same with Tannehill (although like you I agree the potential is there and think he might do well). If Gabbert doesnt do anything well I could see the Jags maybe looking to get another qb, but really Gabbert has no one to throw to (we'll see what Blackmon turns into, but the rest of the receiving core is pretty awful). Harbaugh and Smith are married for a few more years imo, and seattle has Wilson who's been turning heads and that contract with flynn pretty much guarantees two more years probably.
)
Madden 13 Demo Details
in NFL General
Posted
I liked the demo. It performs very well and is by far the best of the sports games out there.