Jacoby Brissett Impressions: (Perma Merge)

[SteelCityColt 8,200]

1 minute ago, GoatBeard said:

The odds say that, yes. But only because the casino uses games that naturally favor the house, not because of statistical analysis itself. 

 

I am not saying it isn't a powerful tool. For example watch the movie Rounders. It is a perfect example of someone being better at statistical analysis than the casino and is based on a true story.  But the casino doesn't allow those people to play and sit at the table long enough to clean them out.

 

Rounders really isn't about that... it's about reading your opponent at a poker table (which isn't a house game in that film). Do you mean whatever the film was called about card counting teams for blackjack?

 

You can't beat the odds on house games (barring one, and they've removed that). From what you've posted, it would be say possible to "beat" roulette by analysing previous results. You can't.

 

As a side note my background was going from working in casinos to somehow ending up formulating health care strategy for over half a million people. I do a lot of looking at previous trends to identify future models of care. I know gambling and I know numbers.. 

[PrincetonTiger 9,568]

Just now, SteelCityColt said:

 

But the point @GoatBeard is making (or so I understand it to be), is there are no sure things. So you can have a very strong evidence base that something has happened 99.99% of the time, but there is still always a chance of a surprise. 

 

Then it's more into things like EV, Value Propositions etc etc. 

 I like the eye test

 

       There are so many factors that determine if a person will be successful at their chosen career

[GoatBeard 694]

Just now, SteelCityColt said:

 

Rounders really isn't about that... it's about reading your opponent at a poker table (which isn't a house game in that film). Do you mean whatever the film was called about card counting teams for blackjack?

 

You can't beat the odds on house games (barring one, and they've removed that). From what you've posted, it would be say possible to "beat" roulette by analysing previous results. You can't.

 

As a side note my background was going from working in casinos to somehow ending up formulating health care strategy for over half a million people. I do a lot of looking at previous trends to identify future models of care. I know gambling and I know numbers.. 

Yes, I meant 21. My fault.

 

You can still beat the house at blackjack by counting cards, which is actually much easier than people think if you're good with math in your head. But they won't tolerate it and as soon as you start winning too much you'll come under suspicion. 

 

I dont doubt you know numbers, but would you agree some in your field are better than others at it? Because it's a subjective art?

[DiogoZ 22]

33 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Okay, is the following objective or subjective?

 

I'm always lurking in the forum reading all the messages. And you, @Superman and @EastStreet has been like teachers for me in terms of statistics and all that. Thank you all!

 

 

[Myles 2,615]

I have no idea what is being argued here.   At first I thought it was - Brissett? Good or bad?

 

No doubt the pass offense has taken a hit.   Luck left, did we expect it to stay the same?

 

The WR group and WR injuries has had an effect as well.   Luck could operate with a less than stellar group.  Brissett is not at that point and may never be.  Brissett is in the top 14 in most meaningful passing categories.   It seems he has been doing what Reich is asking of him.  The next 6 games will show us I eager we should be to draft a QB.    

[SteelCityColt 8,200]

10 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

Yes, I meant 21. My fault.

 

You can still beat the house at blackjack by counting cards, which is actually much easier than people think if you're good with math in your head. But they won't tolerate it and as soon as you start winning too much you'll come under suspicion. 

 

I dont doubt you know numbers, but would you agree some in your field are better than others at it? Because it's a subjective art?

 

That's not so much statistical analysis,and as you say, it's easy to spot. They succeeded more from how they manipulated who was doing the counting vs the betting. It really doesn't give you a huge advantage (circa 1%), so you have to step you bet when the deck is hot to profit and you stick out like a sore thumb. Shuffling machines are more prevalent now as well which removes the "memory" from the game rendering counting useless. 

 

Statistical analysis isn't an art, it's a science. Knowing what to do with the analysis is more the difference. That's more down to knowing your subject area and how to apply it. But again there are methodologies to these things, system analysis etc etc. 

 

Stats get a bad rep because people cherry pick out of context. 

8 minutes ago, Myles said:

I have no idea what is being argued here.   At first I thought it was - Brissett? Good or bad?

 

 

Sorry, I get excited by graphs. I'll go have a lie down. 

[SteelCityColt 8,200]

8 minutes ago, DiogoZ said:

I'm always lurking in the forum reading all the messages. And you, @Superman and @EastStreet has been like teachers for me in terms of statistics and all that. Thank you all!

 

 

 

Pretty much my whole understanding of how the cap actually works came from @Superman's posts. Why I joined the forum in the first place really. It's hard when there the people in real life who know the NFL and few and far between. 

[Myles 2,615]

2 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

 

 

Sorry, I get excited by graphs. I'll go have a lie down. 

Most of the graphs and such I've seen here show Reich in more of a bad light than Jacoby I think. 

Many of the dump off passes seem designed.   Different when Jacoby looks downfield first.  Thos are him giving up on downfield and taking the "safe" easy short throw.  But many times that does work for a team the can run the ball.    

 

 

[shastamasta 2,078]

1 hour ago, PrincetonTiger said:

With this injury will he leave Alabama    
   

 

I would think so...he doesn't have anything left to prove.

 

Are you saying he might stay in school another year...or that he might be done done?

[DiogoZ 22]

5 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Pretty much my whole understanding of how the cap actually works came from @Superman's posts. Why I joined the forum in the first place really. It's hard when there the people in real life who know the NFL and few and far between. 

I feel you. Where I live no one knows nothing about the more in-depth stuff, so I just focus on searching and learning by myself. You guys are cool

 

I guess I'll start to lurk less and participate more lol

[PrincetonTiger 9,568]

4 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

I would think so...he doesn't have anything left to prove.

 

Are you saying he might stay in school another year...or that he might be done done?

Since he is a Jr. he has the option    
    He might have to prove that he is back to 100%

            If it appears that he might drop a lot it might be in his best interest to stay in college

 

          No One knows but this type of injury  has been a career ender for others

[PrincetonTiger 9,568]

13 minutes ago, Myles said:

Most of the graphs and such I've seen here show Reich in more of a bad light than Jacoby I think. 

Many of the dump off passes seem designed.   Different when Jacoby looks downfield first.  Thos are him giving up on downfield and taking the "safe" easy short throw.  But many times that does work for a team the can run the ball.    

 

 

I see them as positive since FR tends to modify his O to his personnel 

[Myles 2,615]

2 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I see them as positive since FR tends to modify his O to his personnel 

I agree, but those who argue that the team needs more passing yards would view it as a negative.   

[Superman 35,707]

2 minutes ago, Myles said:

I agree, but those who argue that the team needs more passing yards would view it as a negative.   

 

I've taken issue with some of Reich's play calling this year. Even if he's being conservative, I'd like to see more play action from under center, especially on second down, and I'd like to see more screens.

[PrincetonTiger 9,568]

2 minutes ago, Myles said:

I agree, but those who argue that the team needs more passing yards would view it as a negative.   

They probably would hate being me 

      Growing up around teams that ran run heavy Power I or Wing T Offenses

  

   

 

    

[ColtsBlueFL 5,972]

3 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Please explain to me how the unit last year with most of the same guys were 6th, and this year they are 25th.

 

I don't even need to research this. I've listened to those here and I think I understand-

 

It's because the current QB locks on to his (double covered) #1 receiver too long, doesn't go through progressions, can't find the open guy, throws it way too hard for any of the receivers to catch, isn't accurate when he throws, and when they finally get one they can catch, it is for low yardage and there's no YAC.  Thus, the Y/A and ANY/A stink.

 

Therefore, the game plan and play calls should be to hand off the ball, early and often and hope they can make plays, play great D, all while scouring the draft mocks for replacement college QB's.

 

 

 

How did I do? Do I win?

 

 

 

All sarcasm aside, I'm still in evaluation mode.  Thursday is an important game. And those division games that follow.

[PrincetonTiger 9,568]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I've taken issue with some of Reich's play calling this year. Even if he's being conservative, I'd like to see more play action from under center, especially on second down, and I'd like to see more screens.

Sometimes the personnel available doesn’t allow that or tip off the DC

[GoatBeard 694]

25 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

That's not so much statistical analysis,and as you say, it's easy to spot. They succeeded more from how they manipulated who was doing the counting vs the betting. It really doesn't give you a huge advantage (circa 1%), so you have to step you bet when the deck is hot to profit and you stick out like a sore thumb. Shuffling machines are more prevalent now as well which removes the "memory" from the game rendering counting useless. 

 

Statistical analysis isn't an art, it's a science. Knowing what to do with the analysis is more the difference. That's more down to knowing your subject area and how to apply it. But again there are methodologies to these things, system analysis etc etc. 

 

Stats get a bad rep because people cherry pick out of context. 

 

Sorry, I get excited by graphs. I'll go have a lie down. 

No. Statistics is science. Analysis is an art.

 

You talk in circles, I'm done with you twisting stuff and carrying this convo everywhere just so you can avoid admitting that the word objective wasn't used correctly.

 

[ColtsBlueFL 5,972]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I've taken issue with some of Reich's play calling this year. Even if he's being conservative, I'd like to see more play action from under center, especially on second down, and I'd like to see more screens.

 

I've been less than enamored as well.  But I don't know why he and Sirianni create the play call sheet they do, and why the call the plays on it like they have been.

 

Also, how often does JB change the play?

[PrincetonTiger 9,568]

4 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

I've been less than enamored as well.  

Also, how often does JB change the play?

So true

[Superman 35,707]

Just now, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

I've been less than enamored as well.  But I don't know why he and Sirianni create the play call sheet they do, and why the call the plays on it like they have been.

 

Also, how often does JB change the play?

 

To the bolded, I'm gonna go with never. And by "never," I mean less than 5% of the time. And that's just my observation, not based on anything that I'm presenting as absolute fact. 

 

As for why they're calling the plays they are, I think there are multiple reasons. First, I believe they're coaching to their personnel, as others have said, and the biggest change this season is the QB. And over the last few weeks, lots of injuries at critical positions. So that's fine. 

 

But I don't understand the lack of screen plays. To me, there's one explanation, and it's that we're not good at screens, but that bothers me. We should be able to run a moderate amount of screens with a moderate degree of success, and every once in a while get a big one to go. We did on third and long Sunday, so big props, but let's see more of those in less throwaway situations.

[Superman 35,707]

10 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Sometimes the personnel available doesn’t allow that or tip off the DC

 

That's a very general statement that doesn't really bring anything to the conversation.

 

There's literally no personnel grouping on offense that would prevent a play action pass. And unless we have zero backs on the field, there's no grouping that would prevent play action from under center (and with all the injuries at WR, we're not using zero back formations). 

 

Play action on second down isn't going to tip off the DC. More importantly, I don't care if it does. Play action isn't for sucking in every defender and going over the top, it's for opening some pass windows and slowing down the pass rush. It's not going to happen, but I'd love to see 50% of our pass attempts come off of play action. And when we're running the ball down the defense's throat like we did Sunday, maybe every pass attempt would be play action, with the exception of third and long. 

[PrincetonTiger 9,568]

Just now, Superman said:

 

To the bolded, I'm gonna go with never. And by "never," I mean less than 5% of the time. And that's just my observation, not based on anything that I'm presenting as absolute fact. 

 

As for why they're calling the plays they are, I think there are multiple reasons. First, I believe they're coaching to their personnel, as others have said, and the biggest change this season is the QB. And over the last few weeks, lots of injuries at critical positions. So that's fine. 

 

But I don't understand the lack of screen plays. To me, there's one explanation, and it's that we're not good at screens, but that bothers me. We should be able to run a moderate amount of screens with a moderate degree of success, and every once in a while get a big one to go. We did on third and long Sunday, so big props, but let's see more of those in less throwaway situations.

The lack of screens might be based on the personnel groups

     Example

        So far Hines has struggled to produce great rushes so when he is in the backfield Ds can key on screen

[PrincetonTiger 9,568]

Just now, Superman said:

 

That's a very general statement that doesn't really bring anything to the conversation.

 

There's literally no personnel grouping on offense that would prevent a play action pass. And unless we have zero backs on the field, there's no grouping that would prevent play action from under center (and with all the injuries at WR, we're not using zero back formations). 

 

Play action on second down isn't going to tip off the DC. More importantly, I don't care if it does. Play action isn't for sucking in every defender and going over the top, it's for opening some pass windows and slowing down the pass rush. It's not going to happen, but I'd love to see 50% of our pass attempts come off of play action. And when we're running the ball down the defense's throat like we did Sunday, maybe every pass attempt would be play action, with the exception of third and long. 

 

Just now, PrincetonTiger said:

The lack of screens might be based on the personnel groups

     Example

        So far Hines has struggled to produce great rushes so when he is in the backfield Ds can key on screen

 

[ColtsBlueFL 5,972]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

It's not going to happen, but I'd love to see 50% of our pass attempts come off of play action. And when we're running the ball down the defense's throat like we did Sunday, maybe every pass attempt would be play action, with the exception of third and long. 

 

Agreed.  I, and I believe solon, were calling for more P.A. fake plays on chat. The setup for it doesn't get any better.

[PrincetonTiger 9,568]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

That's a very general statement that doesn't really bring anything to the conversation.

 

There's literally no personnel grouping on offense that would prevent a play action pass. And unless we have zero backs on the field, there's no grouping that would prevent play action from under center (and with all the injuries at WR, we're not using zero back formations). 

 

Play action on second down isn't going to tip off the DC. More importantly, I don't care if it does. Play action isn't for sucking in every defender and going over the top, it's for opening some pass windows and slowing down the pass rush. It's not going to happen, but I'd love to see 50% of our pass attempts come off of play action. And when we're running the ball down the defense's throat like we did Sunday, maybe every pass attempt would be play action, with the exception of third and long. 

Personnel grouping and even stances can tip off certain plays

 

     If you have a back in that struggles running but is a great receiver, it can tip of the D

[SteelCityColt 8,200]

20 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

No. Statistics is science. Analysis is an art.

 

You talk in circles, I'm done with you twisting stuff and carrying this convo everywhere just so you can avoid admitting that the word objective wasn't used correctly.

 

Im sorry that you feel that way, I was enjoying the conversation.

[Superman 35,707]

1 minute ago, PrincetonTiger said:

The lack of screens might be based on the personnel groups

     Example

        So far Hines has struggled to produce great rushes so when he is in the backfield Ds can key on screen

 

Run a bubble screen. Run a fake screen to Hines (gasp!) Run a screen when Hines isn't on the field. Throw one to Mack (double gasp!)

 

These plays are in the playbook. Reich worked with Doug Pederson for two years, before that he worked with Mike McCoy and Ken Whisenhunt (who at one point, seemingly forever ago, were pretty good OCs), before that he worked with Tom Moore and Peyton Manning... and he's a pretty good play caller when he wants to be. We have this stuff at our disposal. 

[PrincetonTiger 9,568]

2 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Agreed.  I, and I believe solon, were calling for more P.A. fake plays on chat. The setup for it doesn't get any better.

The problem on Sunday was that PA relies on repetition and when Mack went out the opportunity went out the window

 

   

[Superman 35,707]

1 minute ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Personnel grouping and even stances can tip off certain plays

 

     If you have a back in that struggles running but is a great receiver, it can tip of the D

 

Do it anyway, and let's see what happens.

[PrincetonTiger 9,568]

Just now, Superman said:

 

Run a bubble screen. Run a fake screen to Hines (gasp!) Run a screen when Hines isn't on the field. Throw one to Mack (double gasp!)

 

These plays are in the playbook. Reich worked with Doug Pederson for two years, before that he worked with Mike McCoy and Ken Whisenhunt (who at one point, seemingly forever ago, were pretty good OCs), before that he worked with Tom Moore and Peyton Manning... and he's a pretty good play caller when he wants to be. We have this stuff at our disposal. 

Why does it matter

 

     Just because FR doesn’t like or feel comfortable with a set of plays doesn’t make him a bad HC

 

   Running PA is like running a Wing T Offense     
       It takes repetition 

[PrincetonTiger 9,568]

8 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Do it anyway, and let's see what happens.

So people will complain if it doesn’t work and the team loses the game

 

 

     That is what practice is for 

 

  Doing that on a game day is one way to get an extended vacation 

[OffensivelyPC 5,618]

2 hours ago, GoatBeard said:

Why? Because you say so?

 

Teams defy stats all the time. 

 

What is the anti Brissett crowds argument if it's not that he limits our ability to win? Because I apparently dont get it.

That requires you to listen with an open mind.  Something you've not demonstrated.  At all. 

 

Someone comes at you with stats, "Stats don't matter!  I coached high school and it's like taking a school bus of kids down the field safely!"  Okay, what about film analysis?  He's not throwing guys open?  "Look at his TD-INT ratio!"   Yeah but Reich seems to be treating him differently than Luck, because he's not seeing the field well enough.  I think Reich runs the ball more and limits the playbook for JB so it masks his weaknesses, weaknesses that Luck didn't have.  "2018 doesn't matter!  Stats don't matter again!  We're winning and could be 9-1!  Why doens't anyone understand meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!"  

 

 

[Superman 35,707]

5 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Why does it matter

 

     Just because FR doesn’t like or feel comfortable with a set of plays doesn’t make him a bad HC

 

   Running PA is like running a Wing T Offense     
       It takes repetition 

 

1 minute ago, PrincetonTiger said:

So people will complain if it doesn’t work and the team loses the game

 

 

     That is what practice is for 

 

  Doing that on a game day is one way to get an extended vacation 

 

I never called Reich a bad coach, and I never complained that he was costing us games. Don't do this strawman stuff, please.

 

And how do you know he doesn't feel comfortable with screen passes? He called one on third and 19 and it converted. He calls play action, just at about the same clip as every other typical NFL play caller.

 

I've been saying since 2013 that I think it's time for someone to test the upper limits of the play action threshold. I'd love for that to be this year's Colts, especially since we have a capable rushing attack. But I'll even settle for 10% more play action, with some of those PA attempts coming from under center.

 

I promise that if it's not successful (however we're qualifying "success"), I won't call for Reich to be fired because he called too much play action. Scouts honor.

[OffensivelyPC 5,618]

15 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Run a bubble screen. Run a fake screen to Hines (gasp!) Run a screen when Hines isn't on the field. Throw one to Mack (double gasp!)

 

These plays are in the playbook. Reich worked with Doug Pederson for two years, before that he worked with Mike McCoy and Ken Whisenhunt (who at one point, seemingly forever ago, were pretty good OCs), before that he worked with Tom Moore and Peyton Manning... and he's a pretty good play caller when he wants to be. We have this stuff at our disposal. 

That's one thing I don't understand we haven't done.  Hines needs to be in space.  Wouldn't that make him the best candidate for a screen?

[EastStreet 2,399]

39 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

I don't even need to research this. I've listened to those here and I think I understand-

 

It's because the current QB locks on to his (double covered) #1 receiver too long, doesn't go through progressions, can't find the open guy, throws it way too hard for any of the receivers to catch, isn't accurate when he throws, and when they finally get one they can catch, it is for low yardage and there's no YAC.  Thus, the Y/A and ANY/A stink.

 

Therefore, the game plan and play calls should be to hand off the ball, early and often and hope they can make plays, play great D, all while scouring the draft mocks for replacement college QB's.

 

How did I do? Do I win?

 

All sarcasm aside, I'm still in evaluation mode.  Thursday is an important game. And those division games that follow.

 

lol. Yes you win! You win a nice small cute puffy dog gif

 

[Superman 35,707]

1 minute ago, OffensivelyPC said:

That's one thing I don't understand we haven't done.  Hines needs to be in space.  Wouldn't that make him the best candidate for a screen?

 

The prevailing counter argument seems to be that if you throw a screen to Hines, the defense will immediately stop him because they know he's out there to catch screens (even though we never throw any to him, so go figure). 

 

And at the same time, there's a vocal objection every time Hines gets an inside carry, because he's supposed to be used in space.

 

So don't establish any trends, and don't call any trend busters. Just ... I don't know ... punt???

[SteelCityColt 8,200]

1 hour ago, DiogoZ said:

I feel you. Where I live no one knows nothing about the more in-depth stuff, so I just focus on searching and learning by myself. You guys are cool

 

I guess I'll start to lurk less and participate more lol

I’ll say this about the forum, the more you put in, the more you get out. So don’t be reticent to jump in. 

[DiogoZ 22]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

 

I never called Reich a bad coach, and I never complained that he was costing us games. Don't do this strawman stuff, please.

 

And how do you know he doesn't feel comfortable with screen passes? He called one on third and 19 and it converted. He calls play action, just at about the same clip as every other typical NFL play caller.

 

I've been saying since 2013 that I think it's time for someone to test the upper limits of the play action threshold. I'd love for that to be this year's Colts, especially since we have a capable rushing attack. But I'll even settle for 10% more play action, with some of those PA attempts coming from under center.

 

I promise that if it's not successful (however we're qualifying "success"), I won't call for Reich to be fired because he called too much play action. Scouts honor.

 

I really can't think of any incredible good motive to not use more PA. It would at least help Brissett on the passing game.

 

I've been asking myself every game this same question: Why? Why wouldn't we abuse of the PA when (mainly) our running games is destroying the competition.

 

Well, I guess that's one more question to a season full of them.

[SteelCityColt 8,200]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

The prevailing counter argument seems to be that if you throw a screen to Hines, the defense will immediately stop him because they know he's out there to catch screens (even though we never throw any to him, so go figure). 

 

And at the same time, there's a vocal objection every time Hines gets an inside carry, because he's supposed to be used in space.

 

So don't establish any trends, and don't call any trend busters. Just ... I don't know ... punt???

You run the classic Whalen S/T play, that’s what you do. 
 

Hines is a tough one for me, I like a lot of what he can offer, but as you lay out in the above, how to best use him. 
 

Thoughts on some 2RB formations?