Kevinicus
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 20,816
- Reaction score
- 13,683
It's torture at times.You probably don’t want to be on the internet or social media though lol.
Thankfully, here, it's mostly just "historic" and "sniff" that people abuse.
It's torture at times.You probably don’t want to be on the internet or social media though lol.
4 game sample is silly, but if the sample range is 26 years, the data is the data and you’re being needlessly dismissive and pedanticThe top 3 are in the last 6 years. That makes the Cowboys 4th in the last 6 years.
In no way does that classify as anything resembling "historic."
It's also comparing 4 games to full seasons.
uhhh what? reading it directly as intended isn’t picking it apart. quite the opposite. like i’m fine saying “historic” is silly, that 4 games is meaningless, and being on (and behind) a list with the 24 commanders is not impressive, but the guy you’re quoting is the one picking it apart. data is dataBecause they wanna believe the post. If they didn't, they would be picking it apart.
You really can't make this stuff up.
Besides with the investment in the offense, they SHOULD be approaching historic. How else you gonna be the GOTI??
right. i don’t understand people"What do 'pace' mean?!?"
And LOL at the notion that it doesn't count as "historic" if other similarly historic seasons happened recently.
![]()
I love when people are this wrong.The top 3 are in the last 6 years. That makes the Cowboys 4th in the last 6 years.
In no way does that classify as anything resembling "historic."
It's also comparing 4 games to full seasons.
lol was waiting for thisI love when people are this wrong.
It is literally filtered for 4 games for those teams. You think teams had ~40 drives a season? lol
Define historic. It ranks 5th out of 832 samples. <1% of teams have done this.Who argued it wasn't good or impressive?
We're talking about the word "historic". People here throw it around flippantly about everything.
Doesn't matter if it's something that has happened many times before. As long as it's near one extreme or the other, it suddenly becomes "historic."
I miss when words had actual meaning.
I did miss that 4 G listed on there. That does make the comparison more apt, but even more meaningless.I love when people are this wrong.
It is literally filtered for 4 games for those teams. You think teams had ~40 drives a season? lol
How does that make it historic?Define historic. It ranks 5th out of 832 samples. <1% of teams have done this.
So you have an arbitrary and subjective definition of historic.How does that make it historic?
Impressive? Sure. Notable, yeah, for now. Historic? No.
Is it important to history? No.
Does it have historical impact? No.
Will it be remembered forever? No.
Is it going to change things in the NFL due to it's significant? No.
Not historic.
What do you think historic means?So you have an arbitrary and subjective definition of historic.
Not really worth arguing about.
I don't think it means anything, which is why I think being pedantic about it in an effort to devalue the offense is dumb.What do you think historic means?
Maybe you are thinking "historical".
That is the point though. It is not on a pace to be historic. It is on a pace to be the 5th best offense since 2000. Nothing about it, at this time, seems to meet the definition of historic. I asked what a historic NFL offense should mean.like i’m fine saying “historic” is silly
Also we are 2nd in scoring per game. 28th in defensive points allowed.Per drive. Read lol
It's literally in the definitions given for historic.So you have an arbitrary and subjective definition of historic.
Not really worth arguing about.
Those things are literally all subjective.It's literally in the definitions given for historic.
It does have a definition. It does have a meaning.I don't think it means anything, which is why I think being pedantic about it in an effort to devalue the offense is dumb.
If they maintain this pace, it'll be the best offense in NFL history. You are ignoring the word "pace."
Agree to disagree. The questions he asked in post 49 are about determining an event's historic significance. Currently the answer to all of them are solidly no.Those things are literally all subjective.
You literally can't even spell "embarrassment".If you say so.
I don; t mind stats. Even narrow ones. But when I guy argues every stat MUST be "per drive"...EVERY time? YOU..know full well this isn't the first time. You jumped in my junk the last time he did it. You know he does it every time.
He...is the "embarrasement". So are you.

Points per drive.Sorry to be so dumb - what is Pts/D??
