Week 8 Reich Grievance MEGA THREAD (merge)

[2006Coltsbestever]

I wonder how much pull Wentz has regarding being able to change plays after reading the D pre-snap? He could of audible out of it as well and gave it to Hines who was in the back field.

[Nesjan3]

Just now, Nickster said:

Dude if you think we are just going to be able to line up and pound, I just disagree.   Hasn't happened since my HS won the state championship in 1982 or at least the early 90s Cowboys.  Just pounding will not defeat any of the defenses in the league let alone the ones we need to beat in the postseason. 

 

Taylor is possibly the most explosive back in the open field I have ever seen., but JT is limited in the types of runs he's efficient at.  Everybody says we need to get him in space and I agree when we can, he's explosive as can be there, but hasn't been great at finding the open seam and getting to open space in the run game.  He's not good at running laterally with the LOS and cutting up field. He hasn't been very good at not running into the backs of piles and cutting back with patience, but he did show some of this ability in 1Q on Sunday which is encouraging.  But he's also not good at pass pro.  He's also not the type of receiver to get downfield and shake a cover LB to get himself open.

 

He's good at what he's good at, but he's not all that creative and generally benefits from well defined lanes and leaking out of the backfield and taking dumpoffs right up the field,  though lately he's been finding cracks and seams which is great, but he still needs to run primarily down hill

 

Hines is pretty much good at pass pro, and some of the other stuff JT isn't good at.

 

This is not controversial BTW either.  JT runs like his college reports said he should, and he's explosive.  A really good player but I just think that people that think we are just going to line up and send Taylor into the line don't understand the game very well the way it's played today.  There are plenty of numbers to back up what I was saying last year in part.  He wasn't good at breaking tackles, and wasn't good at making people miss.  At the very bottom actually.  

 

He's better than I thought and improving, but is always going to have certain things he's limited at.  He's a downfield one cut type of guy and really direct.  This is great when it works, but if that is all that the D has to prepare for, it's not going to be what you think it is.

 

So I think I understand what Doug is saying though I wouldn't go so far as to say worse, but limited yes.  

 

 

Nobody is saying to just line up and pound, people are saying to balance the offense more lol. Wentz throwing 51 times you will lose every game, he will throw 2 int every time. 

 

Im not listening to your rambling about Taylors deficiency's its ridiculous. He is one of the best young backs in the league period. If your not happy with him I dont think you will ever be happy with any RB

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour ago, Nickster said:

 

But a lot of these arguments are what Joe Maddon used to call outcome bias. 

 

Up until 2 minutes in the 3rd, I think it would be a foolish argument to say that Frank should have done anything different.  We had scored 24 points with zero turnovers and actually led in time of possession, so that argument would not be very well supported. 

We had 2 or three different runs called back on holding too.  

 

Frank has plenty of reasons to be criticized, but I don't think there is any reason to criticized his play calling overall through 3Qs other than outcome bias.  The gameplan worked.  The mix worked.  There are individual plays that can be criticized, but overall I think arguments are short sighted and disingenous.

 

We lost largely because of defensive issues with getting off the field on 3rd down again and again and again like has been going on for years,  and CW defecating in the bed. Not because Frank is an incompetent play caller IMO. 

 

  Frank had called one of his most wide open, creative games yet. Through 3 quarters as you point out.
 I have to believe he is getting input from M Brady and help from the booth as to what Tenn. is doing. There was a place for several more runs for sure.
 We need to move Mack for a WR and pray our just called up RB can provide some help.

[Shive]

18 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

God forbid I be accused of being snarky, but plain and simple, this is a bad post.  
 

Opinion, opinion, opinion, opinion….  All masquerading as fact.  
 

You’re a good poster and you mean well, but all your observations about Frank have been true every year.   All coaches look tired.  It’s a 100 hour a week job at a minimum.  Losing is brutally hard. 
 

There's no need for some kind of intervention.  If it were true, there would be interventions all over the NFL all the time.  
 

The idea that you think Ballard is divorced from his team, and that he doesn’t know right now what his coaches and player think shows you just don’t know the Colts like you think you do.  
 

If the season gets away, then so be it.  It’s one season.  A blip on the radar.  Well run teams don’t panic.   If there are problems internally then they will be fixed this off-season. 
 

Just because some in the fan base are panicking, and this post is a 100 percent panic post,  doesn’t mean the Colts have to panic as well. 
 

You’re a good poster.  Much better than this.  But this post is an over-reaction to a disappointing season.  Nothing more. 

The bolded is spot on.

 

This is way nicer than I wanted to be.

[DougDew]

24 minutes ago, Nesjan3 said:

I just see a pattern with Frank and I comment that is all

I think he makes some head scratching decisions too.  Pagano was bad at the HC stuff, game planning and being ill prepared and time management.  Stuff that only the HC is responsible for.

 

What I see with Frank is more play calling stuff, but, there is also the element that the play gets blown up by poor execution on the field, so what portion is paly calling and what is execution.  

 

The pattern that I see is a HC that coaches a team with major holes in it every year.  From a QB that can't throw the ball, to a QB that can't throw long, to a retread that seems to be losing his composure.  A HC that likes to spread the ball around, but has no down field threat and a bunch of UDFA quality guys (that are "open" on all 22 view LOL), and a RB corp that has players totally deficient in versatile talent.  This year he's had to deal with a bad oline.

 

Having to play with a defense that, despite being schemed to have a pass rush on every play because of 4 Dlineman, can't generate a pass rush, has LBers and Ss that can't cover a crossing route, and generally plays with talent one step above UDFA quality in a lot of positions.

 

Some of the challenges are due to injury, hanging on to injured players hoping they will recover, or just plain bad drafting.

 

So its hard for me to pin an opinion on Frank and Flus when they have to spend so much time punching out of their confines just to get to level water. 

 

I don't ever expect the Colts to have a winning record, simply based upon the personnel that has been playing every Sunday, so when they do, it must be because of superior coaching.

[Defjamz26]

After Sunday’s loss, I think it’s clear where the issues lie. I was just curious as to what percentage of the issues people feel are coaching vs talent.

 

Personally I have it 60% coaching and 40% talent. 
 

While we have clear holes at key positions that have existed for awhile, I think coaching is really killing us. Eberflus’ scheme leaves receivers wide open and we are failing to get to the QB.

 

Reich? Well I won’t keep beating a dead horse. His short comings have been noted. He’s never entirely to blame for any loss, but questionable playcalling and decision making have put the team in multiple bad spots.

 

 

Also, whoever is deciding how much usage the RB’s get should have those duties stripped away. This issue where JT stops getting the ball inexplicably when he’s running well has to stop.

 

[Nickster]

43 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

You really should look closer at the definition of outcome bias. 

"Outcome bias arises when a decision is based on the outcome of previous events, without regard to how the past events developed. Outcome bias does not involve analysis of factors that lead to a previous event, and instead de-emphasizes the events preceding the outcomes and overemphasizes the outcome"

 

First thing off the net.  This is pretty much what I meant.  Maybe a slight technicality in saying hindsight bias, but I mean a lack of analysis in factors leading to an outcome.  

[EastStreet]

Folks can say whatever they want..... but....

• Frank does look look beat down in the pressers, and certainly hasn't exuded confidence. It's not a good look. 
• Him acting like he didn't know what the run/pass ratio was, was just, well, sad... 
• His demeanor is very different than the past two years. If you don't believe it, watch some old pressers.

[Superman]

10 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

No kidding.  I get it people are mad at Frank and he deserves criticism for yesterday but I am starting to feel like we need hand out pacifiers and put everyone down for a nap because it’s seems like everyone needs their own thread to say what’s already been said.  

 

Have you ever noticed how quiet the board is after a win, compared with how many new threads there are after a loss?

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, Nickster said:

"Outcome bias arises when a decision is based on the outcome of previous events, without regard to how the past events developed. Outcome bias does not involve analysis of factors that lead to a previous event, and instead de-emphasizes the events preceding the outcomes and overemphasizes the outcome"

 

First thing off the net.  This is pretty much what I meant.  Maybe a slight technicality in saying hindsight bias, but I mean a lack of analysis in factors leading to an outcome.  

 

I'm not de-emphasizing the preceding events, I'm emphasizing them. 

And I emphasized the same on several previous occasions prior to this particular game.

Which is why I said outcome bias is not an accurate narrative here.

[TimetobringDfence!]

19 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

God forbid I be accused of being snarky, but plain and simple, this is a bad post.  
 

Opinion, opinion, opinion, opinion….  All masquerading as fact.  
 

You’re a good poster and you mean well, but all your observations about Frank have been true every year.   All coaches look tired.  It’s a 100 hour a week job at a minimum.  Losing is brutally hard. 
 

There's no need for some kind of intervention.  If it were true, there would be interventions all over the NFL all the time.  
 

The idea that you think Ballard is divorced from his team, and that he doesn’t know right now what his coaches and player think shows you just don’t know the Colts like you think you do.  
 

If the season gets away, then so be it.  It’s one season.  A blip on the radar.  Well run teams don’t panic.   If there are problems internally then they will be fixed this off-season. 
 

Just because some in the fan base are panicking, and this post is a 100 percent panic post,  doesn’t mean the Colts have to panic as well. 
 

You’re a good poster.  Much better than this.  But this post is an over-reaction to a disappointing season.  Nothing more. 

Some of us are more critical by nature, I call it how I see it too... Frank's red flags are growing...

[GoColts8818]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Have you ever noticed how quiet the board is after a win, compared with how many new threads there are after a loss?

Yes and it’s not lost on me.  I also notice those who have nothing to say after a win and have about 1938437 posts after a loss.

[TimetobringDfence!]

Just now, Superman said:

 

Have you ever noticed how quiet the board is after a win, compared with how many new threads there are after a loss?

I never really noticed... but that's the nature of the beast... especially when losing becomes a pattern stained in poor situational play calling and chronic knack for benching the run game...

[John Hammonds]

I'm certain that the stress level is high.  VERY high.

You're boss's boss declared his intention to win multiple superbowls in the space of ten years, and then turned around and gave you and your boss big, fat contract extensions, fully expecting that YOU are the guys that are going to accomplish it.  Anything less that that cannot be acceptable.  And you can't just simply beat the bad teams.  You've got to beat the good teams.  True, you can legitimately claim injuries as a big problem.  But eventually, that excuse just isn't good enough.  Honeymoon is over.  So, yeah, I wouldn't doubt that he's feeling the stress.  And that it shows.

[DougDew]

19 minutes ago, Nickster said:

"Outcome bias arises when a decision is based on the outcome of previous events, without regard to how the past events developed. Outcome bias does not involve analysis of factors that lead to a previous event, and instead de-emphasizes the events preceding the outcomes and overemphasizes the outcome"

 

First thing off the net.  This is pretty much what I meant.  Maybe a slight technicality in saying hindsight bias, but I mean a lack of analysis in factors leading to an outcome.  

One thing that the proliferation of analytics has done has created a bunch of amateur psychologists who are now experts in the various terms of "bias"  LOL.

 

BTW, there is very little bias in the world.  It called pattern recogniton.  Its instinctive, and the brain throws out the pattern once it sees the pattern changing, because instinctively, all pattern recognition is objective because the brain wants to get things right.

 

What gets in the way of the brains instinctive objectivity is emotion, not bias.  Better said: emotion causes bias.  Emotion is when someone has a vested interest in an outcome, like making a hot take two years ago.

 

Bias can only appear after a person has created a vested interest in the outcome.  If you stay neutral, there is no bias.

 

Bias is what analysts say that everybody has, which is why the term is used so much now, as a way to then have the analysts be seen as the keepers of objectivity.  They have the stats, so they are more objective than the rest of us.  Most people fall for it.  Some of us don't. LOL.

[Solid84]

34 minutes ago, Knuckles79 said:

If he hadn't got rid of the ball when he did on the first int it would've been a safety and titans ball and pretty much game over.

Yeah, it was a really bad playcall and even if Wentz bungled throwing it away it was still better than a safety. 

[TimetobringDfence!]

46 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Wentz's bad day was really TY going out and being 0-8 trying to hit Dulin and Mo-Allie. Not being able to move the ball with them Put Him and Reich In a very bad spot.
 Wentz threw a lot of really good on target passes but was a yard off on most anything he tried to throw to those two. Mo-Allie got no separation nor did Dulin. Dulins balance and timing to go for the ball is insufficient.
 I'm believing Wentz's lack of accuracy to those two was more so on Them and their route running. JMO

So why not use the run game more or Hines as a wr...those options never work out

[Superman]

8 minutes ago, TimetobringDfence! said:

I never really noticed... but that's the nature of the beast... especially when losing becomes a pattern stained in poor situational play calling and chronic knack for benching the run game...

 

It's been that way for a decade, or more. People love to complain, and pile on, when things don't go well, and it creates an overwhelmingly negative environment. Then those same people have nothing to say when we win a game. 

[krunk]

1 hour ago, philba101 said:

Coming into this season, the strengths of this team were thought to be a stout offensive line, a solid defense, and a loaded running back room anchored by young star Jonathan Taylor. Because of ongoing injuries, our line has taken time to come together, and the injury-plagued defense is still struggling badly. But, we still have a loaded running back room. Our infrequent use of running backs this year has caused one running back (Marlon Mack) to want to leave the team. We paid Nyheim Hines big money but his infrequent use has him clearly out of sync with this offense and not contributing on the level he did last year. Taylor has been a beast and has answered the call anytime the Colts have given him the opportunity. So, why in the hell are we throwing the ball 51 times on Sunday, and only running 20 times? If you ask Carson Wentz to throw 51 times each week, more often than not you will get an erratic QB who throws stupid interceptions almost ever time. On Sunday, Jalen Hurts threw 14 passes for 108 yards; the Eagles ran the ball 46 times, for 236 yards and 4 touchdowns. Yes, I know they were playing the Lions, 

 

I think most people would agree that the Colts have really only had one consistent receiver this year (Michael Pittman). So, stop trying to throw the ball all over the universe. Get in a double tight end set and pound your opponents until they give up. Twenty touches a week minimum for Jonathan Taylor, a dozen targets for Hines, don't trade Marlon Mack, utilize him with a dozen targets. Spread the field and let Pittman and Pascal go to work. Chip-block with the tight ends and spring them for the remaining catches. Finally, for the love of everything that is good, stop trying to force your QB to play hero ball. Pound the rock, keep the defense fresh, and please, please, stop playing soft zone coverage on third and long.   Man up, D up, and run the damn ball!

And before this Sirriani was getting pounded in the media for not running the football and passing too much. Sirriani makes similar mistakes as Frank depending on the game.

[ClaytonC]

I think our talent is MUCH better than our coaching.  Look at the Titans, they have 3 or 4 of our cast offs either starting or getting significant playing time.

 

I don't think anyone can name a player our coaches have developed.

 

Some games it seems our coaches are more of a hinderance than any sort of positive.

 

[Myles]

4 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

With our O-line and RB, we should definitely be a run first team. 51 times makes zero sense no matter who the opponent is.

I'm counting it as 54 passing plays since the Wentz 3 runs were pass plays to start with.

[GoColts8818]

[OffensivelyPC]

50 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

He should've ran Taylor more I agree. So I do blame Frank for that but the INT's are on Wentz and I like Wentz. The play call down by the goaline should've been a run with Taylor but Wentz can't make a mistake like that either. 

I'd rather take a pick 6 and have a chance to win the game than take a safety and guarantee losing the game.

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, philba101 said:

Coming into this season, the strengths of this team were thought to be a stout offensive line, a solid defense, and a loaded running back room anchored by young star Jonathan Taylor. Because of ongoing injuries, our line has taken time to come together, and the injury-plagued defense is still struggling badly. But, we still have a loaded running back room. Our infrequent use of running backs this year has caused one running back (Marlon Mack) to want to leave the team. We paid Nyheim Hines big money but his infrequent use has him clearly out of sync with this offense and not contributing on the level he did last year. Taylor has been a beast and has answered the call anytime the Colts have given him the opportunity. So, why in the hell are we throwing the ball 51 times on Sunday, and only running 20 times? If you ask Carson Wentz to throw 51 times each week, more often than not you will get an erratic QB who throws stupid interceptions almost ever time. On Sunday, Jalen Hurts threw 14 passes for 108 yards; the Eagles ran the ball 46 times, for 236 yards and 4 touchdowns. Yes, I know they were playing the Lions, 

 

I think most people would agree that the Colts have really only had one consistent receiver this year (Michael Pittman). So, stop trying to throw the ball all over the universe. Get in a double tight end set and pound your opponents until they give up. Twenty touches a week minimum for Jonathan Taylor, a dozen targets for Hines, don't trade Marlon Mack, utilize him with a dozen targets. Spread the field and let Pittman and Pascal go to work. Chip-block with the tight ends and spring them for the remaining catches. Finally, for the love of everything that is good, stop trying to force your QB to play hero ball. Pound the rock, keep the defense fresh, and please, please, stop playing soft zone coverage on third and long.   Man up, D up, and run the damn ball!

 

That PHI/DET game wasn't remotely close though. If Reich was in that scenario, we probably would have seen a similar output. Wentz probably wouldn't have been on the field for much of the 2nd half.

 

 

[B~Town]

Talent at many premium positions would go a long way . 

[Solid84]

I really hope it’s mostly down to coaching.

 

We’re up against the cap right now and while the cap increases quite a bit next year we still have to pay Q. 
 

Meanwhile we NEED:

-A good WR or pass catching TE

-Passrush. Delayed gratification my *. If we don’t upgrade here during the off season we will be stuck on the outside of the playoffs looking in for at least another season or 2 and that’s if Paye and Dayo pan out. 
-CB and DB.

 

On top of that we’re shipping our 1st rounder to the Eagles. Not enough draft picks to fill our need for star power and no capspace to go get it in FA. 

[Nickster]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

You really should look closer at the definition of outcome bias. 

And BTW, this is what I said

 

 

"But a lot of these arguments are what Joe Maddon used to call outcome bias. "

 

I didn't like Maddon at all after a while and thought he got lucky not throwing away the WS.

 

I think I remember you being a Cub Fan?  Did you like Maddon?  I would suspect not.  I was not a fan. 

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Wentz's bad day was really TY going out and being 0-8 trying to hit Dulin and Mo-Allie. Not being able to move the ball with them Put Him and Reich In a very bad spot.
 Wentz threw a lot of really good on target passes but was a yard off on most anything he tried to throw to those two. Mo-Allie got no separation nor did Dulin. Dulins balance and timing to go for the ball is insufficient.
 I'm believing Wentz's lack of accuracy to those two was more so on Them and their route running. JMO

That's a stat that's more granular as it applies to the specific game and gives us some insight into the innards of how the game flowed.

 

If 6 of those passes were completed, my guess is that most would have been content with the pass/run ratio.

 

I can't comment on Mo's or Dulin's route running, but I noticed that Dulin seems to get messed up when going for the ball.  Timing and balance as you say, just before the moment of catch, looks bad compared to most receivers on an NFL roster.  But its been a small sample size for him as he has not had many targets.  Hopefully its an anomaly that gets improved upon, because he seems to be a good athlete.

 

And the bad day getting worse after TY left is no surprise.  Wentz looked better against the Texans when TY and PC were in the game, for a while.

[2006Coltsbestever]

15 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

I'd rather take a pick 6 and have a chance to win the game than take a safety and guarantee losing the game.

I agree with that part but Wentz could've audible pre-snap and just gave the ball to Hines if he didn't like what he seen. Hines was right next to him. That is why I asked the question earlier as in I wonder how much pull Wentz has?

[Nickster]

33 minutes ago, DougDew said:

One thing that the proliferation of analytics has done has created a bunch of amateur psychologists who are now experts in the various terms of "bias"  LOL.

 

BTW, there is very little bias in the world.  It called pattern recogniton.  Its instinctive, and the brain throws out the pattern once it sees the pattern changing, because instinctively, all pattern recognition is objective because the brain wants to get things right.

 

What gets in the way of the brains instinctive objectivity is emotion, not bias.  Better said: emotion causes bias.  Emotion is when someone has a vested interest in an outcome, like making a hot take two years ago.

 

Bias can only appear after a person has created a vested interest in the outcome.  If you stay neutral, there is no bias.

 

Bias is what analysts say that everybody has, which is why the term is used so much now, as a way to then have the analysts be seen as the keepers of objectivity.  They have the stats, so they are more objective than the rest of us.  Most people fall for it.  Some of us don't. LOL.

Whatever Sigmund. 

[TimetobringDfence!]

25 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

It's been that way for a decade, or more. People love to complain, and pile on, when things don't go well, and it creates an overwhelmingly negative environment. Then those same people have nothing to say when we win a game. 

I like Carson and think he choked a little, he has to be less reckless... With that in mind Frank has to be in tune with and keep the run involved enough to make everyone's life easier...those RPOs and PA we ran in the second half and OT are not very deceptive without some carries here and there...We can win with Carson as QB  and the defensive scheme if Coaches would balance the looks and adjust properly...I honestly think the Colts #1 this year in mismanaging the talent avilable...

Just now, TimetobringDfence! said:

I like Carson and think he choked a little, he has to be less reckless... With that in mind Frank has to be in tune with and keep the run involved enough to make everyone's life easier...those RPOs and PA we ran in the second half and OT are not very deceptive without some carries here and there...We can win with Carson as QB  and the defensive scheme if Coaches would balance the looks and adjust properly...I honestly think the Colts #1 this year in mismanaging the talent avilable...

Positive note the talent is there.. 

[CanuckColtsFan]

43 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Have you ever noticed how quiet the board is after a win, compared with how many new threads there are after a loss?

I have, the fans are really out on this team. I honestly gave up on this season after Baltimore. This team just hurts to watch. They are good enough to give you hope but just seem to find a way to lose when it matters.

[2006Coltsbestever]

5 minutes ago, Nickster said:

And BTW, this is what I said

 

 

"But a lot of these arguments are what Joe Maddon used to call outcome bias. "

 

I didn't like Maddon at all after a while and thought he got lucky not throwing away the WS.

 

I think I remember you being a Cub Fan?  Did you like Maddon?  I would suspect not.  I was not a fan. 

I am a huge Cubs fan, I know off topic but the problem I had with Maddon was he would pull Pitchers too quickly. Cubs did win a WS with him though so I can't dislike the guy. He was smart using Chapman a lot IMO.

[Defjamz26]

30 minutes ago, ClaytonC said:

I don't think anyone can name a player our coaches have developed.

I want to say Leonard but he’s been good since day 1. They certainly have not developed the guys they have said are “developmental” guys. Ya Sin, Banogu, Lewis, Campbell, Turray, etc…

 

The only player that comes to mind is Grover Stewart. He came from Albany and has developed into a great starter. He was a 4th round pick too.

 

But that still invites conversation about talent. Are these players who just aren’t good and Ballard missed on or are these guys who the coaches can’t seem to develop?

[DougDew]

9 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Whatever Sigmund. 

LOL.  Its just that I've heard the term "bias" more in the past two years than in the previous 50, in numerous venues and conversations.  Everybody is an expert on it.

 

Vested interest in an outcome.  Not instinctive at all.

[Nickster]

1 minute ago, Nickster said:

Whatever Sigmund. 

  

BTW, I don't think the screen is all that bad of a call.  I probably wouldn't have called it, but the outcome that resulted from it was about the last thing you would expect.  

 

The OLB stayed with MAC which definitely was not what the Colts were expecting in that situ with the fake to Hines who by the way would have been smashed. 

 

My main point about the screen though was lost among the toe the line crowd.  The main point is that was about as stupid a play as a QB could make at any level because you can't make anything out of a busted screen.

 

Godawful football play by CW.  If he throws it at the feet of the receiver like every coach every on every level of football ever always coached every time for all time, then this thread would be a lot different. 

 

[EastStreet]

4 minutes ago, Nickster said:

And BTW, this is what I said

 

 

"But a lot of these arguments are what Joe Maddon used to call outcome bias. "

 

I didn't like Maddon at all after a while and thought he got lucky not throwing away the WS.

 

I think I remember you being a Cub Fan?  Did you like Maddon?  I would suspect not.  I was not a fan. 

 

I liked Maddon OK when he was with the Cubs. He broke the curse....

I'm not a big baseball fan much anymore, but I grew up with family that cheered for both Chicago and Cinci.

[Nickster]

4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

LOL.  Its just that I've heard the term "bias" more in the past two years than in the previous 50, in numerous venues and conversations.  Everybody is an expert on it.

 

Vested interest in an outcome.  Not instinctive at all.

No prob.  Like your style even when we disagree.  Damn I just don't understand  why people can't just have fun and have to preach all the time.  

 

I think we are all natural psychologists and all prone to emotional bias or whatever you want to call it, and if I remember Maddon, he used outcome bias improperly then to mean looking at the outcome and not the process. 

 

Each football play has all kinds of factors that determine success, not the least of which is what the other guy on the opposite sideline calls. 

[RollerColt]

44 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

It's been that way for a decade, or more. People love to complain, and pile on, when things don't go well, and it creates an overwhelmingly negative environment. Then those same people have nothing to say when we win a game. 

It's not just this board. It's everywhere. In every facet of social media and even outside of the internet. The squeaky wheel gets the grease and the most attention. 

 

If I post something positive, maybe one or two people will like it. But if I vomit a negative post on a dead horse topic, I'll get replies, likes, confused faces, reactions and so on. Discussion rarely happens, it's all about the Tik Tok style hot takes now.  

[Nickster]

14 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I am a huge Cubs fan, I know off topic but the problem I had with Maddon was he would pull Pitchers too quickly. Cubs did win a WS with him though so I can't dislike the guy. He was smart using Chapman a lot IMO.

I think he did a good job of making young players relax and that team needed that IMO, but I think he was a slave to the sheet, and got absolutely bailed in Game 7.  Hendricks was friggin rolling.  Glad I got to share that with the fam though.

 

When Montero hit that HR in the NLCS, I almost passed out in Mom's living Room floor.  I jumped up and screamed and got so light headed I almost took a header.