AdamJT13 v. The Horde, Part 2

[bayeslife]

Boooo

*throws tomato*

 

[dallasdave]

I am proud to be one of the horde. If Adam posted all the running/passing stats and how they effect the game, I would have more respect for his opinion, but to say passing is the only key to victory is wrong. You couldn't pass if the run game didn't keep the defense concerned about rushing the ball.?there are just too many factors involved in winning football games than any one stat can explain.

 

[zrinkill]

I say we get rid of the Running back position.

If we go empty back field we will have an even better chance to win.

100%passing will assure us of victory!

 

[reddyuta]

Pls stop this is really lame.

best thread in weeks.

 

[dallasdave]

I say we get rid of the Running back position.

If we go empty back field we will have an even better chance to win.

100%passing will assure us of victory!

 

[BlindFaith]

How many World Series has Billy Beane won????

His main numbers guys Depodesta just quit MLB and joined the Browns- who drafted 5 WRs this draft

Big Bang Theory Football except JJones is no Sheldon

And good luck with that. Baseball is an individual sport. Your stats are yours. How well you hit, how well you catch. You are not dependant on anything else.

Football is the ultimate team sport. Skill positions are dependant on the offensive line. Team offense is dependant on team defense. Stats alone can't be used to determine performance.

And if his plan is to leverage sabermetrics to individual players measurables, he will miss out on many, many players that don't "measure" up but are still very productive.

 

[dallasdave]

best thread in weeks.

 

[reddyuta]

I say we get rid of the Running back position.

If we go empty back field we will have an even better chance to win.

100%passing will assure us of victory!

sigh,that is not what Adam is saying at all.its like you guys are deliberately playing obtuse .

 

[BlindFaith]

sigh,that is not what Adam is saying at all.its like you guys are deliberately playing obtuse .

That's exactly what he's saying. Rushing has no correlation to winning. Period.

Yet, there is not 1 example of a team winning by passing 100% of the time. Every win has some percentage of rush attempts. So rushing is actually 100% correlated to winning. Now it comes down to efficiency and quantity of both passing and rushing. Both are important, both contribute to winning, both feed into the success of each other.

He doesn't believe that. He hasn't found the stat that explains that so to him it isn't important. But real NFL coaches and front offices do believe it. Otherwise they would never run the ball.

 

[zrinkill]

deliberately playing obtuse .

What?

I not even attracted to dudes ........ ya know ........ except brainpaint.

 

[dallasdave]

What?

I not even attracted to dudes ........ ya know ........ except brainpaint.

 

[reddyuta]

That's exactly what he's saying. Rushing has no correlation to winning. Period.

Yet, there is not 1 example of a team winning by passing 100% of the time. Every win has some percentage of rush attempts. So rushing is actually 100% correlated to winning. Now it comes down to efficiency and quantity of both passing and rushing. Both are important, both contribute to winning, both feed into the success of each other.

He doesn't believe that. He hasn't found the stat that explains that so to him it isn't important. But real NFL coaches and front offices do believe it. Otherwise they would never run the ball.

what he is saying is that you win by passing the ball better than others,if you run a no Back shotgun everytime then you either need to be Tom Brady or your passing game wont have much success .

 

[JoaquinFenix]

That's exactly what he's saying. Rushing has no correlation to winning. Period.

Yet, there is not 1 example of a team winning by passing 100% of the time. Every win has some percentage of rush attempts. So rushing is actually 100% correlated to winning. Now it comes down to efficiency and quantity of both passing and rushing. Both are important, both contribute to winning, both feed into the success of each other.

He doesn't believe that. He hasn't found the stat that explains that so to him it isn't important. But real NFL coaches and front offices do believe it. Otherwise they would never run the ball.

You, sir, are The Horde incarnate. I parodied this very rebuttal in Part 2, and you STILL went for it. Amazing, really.

 

[Nightman]

what he is saying is that you win by passing the ball better than others,if you run a no Back shotgun everytime then you either need to be Tom Brady or your passing game wont have much success .

oh yeah and you have to play great D
limit sacks
limit INTs and create them on D

and then you might 80% of the time if the weather, STs and general luck goes your way but it has absolutely nothing at all to do with running the ball well

 

[Nightman]

You, sir, are The Horde incarnate. I parodied this very rebuttal in Part 2, and you STILL went for it. Amazing, really.

I guess he won't be your VP is the Adam Is the Bestest Fan Club

 

[CowboyChris]

ok...this whole argument is lame...its like saying which ever team in basketball shoots better from the 3 point line will win more times than not. their are several variables in winning...coaching, time of possession, turnovers, 3rd down pct, sacks, or just really bad officiating.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

sigh,that is not what Adam is saying at all.its like you guys are deliberately playing obtuse .

I agree that isn't what Adam is saying, but what he is saying, is from a purely statistical stand point, it doesn't matter if you lose 2 yards every time you run, because it's the attempts, not the success that matter. And I would say that it's incorrect, no matter what statistics may show to believe that passing is just as efficient in a 3rd and 12 versus a 3rd and 4. shorter downs and distance as well as play actions do make passing easier as well as having 8 guys in the box. now if you have Teddy Bridgewater and Adrian Peterson, having a great running back will not make him a great QB, but I don't think Bridgewater or the Vikings staff believe having Peterson doesn't make a difference.

 

[jnday]

I say we get rid of the Running back position.

If we go empty back field we will have an even better chance to win.

100%passing will assure us of victory!

I suggested that several days ago and Adsm scoffed at the ideal. His opinion and cherry picked stats would be proven as worthless if RBs was no longer used. Have you noticed the lack of stats showing how the run supports passing success? You will not see those stats from Adam because they don't fit his agenda.

 

[dallasdave]

I suggested that several days ago and Adsm scoffed at the ideal. His opinion and cherry picked stats would be proven as worthless if RBs was no longer used. Have you noticed the lack of stats showing how the run supports passing success? You will not see those stats from Adam because they don't fit his agenda.

 

[Cowboy06]

AdamJT13: *closes eyes, takes a deep breath, exhales*

The Horde: ive been watchin football for 50 years and i KNOW you cant win unless you run the ball good

AdamJT13: It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.

The Horde: Wut?

AdamJT13: Mark Twain.

The Horde: Who?

AdamJT13: Never mind. The point is that the data refute your opinion. You simply do not understand what causes winning in the NFL.

The Horde: Shut your face i saw the 90s Cwoboys win SBs!!1! you dont understand the symbiotic relationship the passing game had with emmitt smith. you need balance!

AdamJT13: As I said before, there is no correlation between rushing effectiveness and passing effectiveness. *cites additional evidence in support of claim*

The Horde: hey guys this guy thinnks you shouldnt run hahaha hes stoopid

AdamJT13: I never said that. It does not matter whether you run the ball a lot or a little, so long as you pass the ball better than your opponent.

The Horde: but aikman didnt have gaudy stats?!

AdamJT13: The 90's Cowboys won because they passed the ball better than their opponents. *cites evidence in support of claim* It is about efficiency, not gaudy stats. Teams tend to pass the ball more at the end of games when they are behind, a predicament in which the 90's Cowboys did not find themselves as often as most other teams. They got ahead early in most games by passing the ball efficiently and defending the pass well.

The Horde: Defense? haha i got you now! you said passing was all that mattered!

AdamJT13: No, I did not. I said passing the ball better than one's opponent correlates strongly with winning. Part of that is how well one defends the pass. This is why the Denver Broncos were able to win the Super Bowl last year despite suspect play from the quarterback position. *cites evidence in support of claim*

The Horde: well all i know was that 2014 was awsome and having romo pass less because of murray's awsome running was good for the team

AdamJT13: Romo actually passed the ball more often in the first half of games in 2014 than he did in the years previously. *cites evidence in support of claim* However, he was so efficient at passing the ball in the first half of those game that the Cowboys were usually playing with a lead and chose to run more in the second half.

The Horde: Exactly! and murray's running kept the defense off the field. Zeke is going to keep our defense off the field next year by dominating the run!

AdamJT13: Actually, the pace of play, completion percentage, and converting third-and-short all correlate more strongly with time of possession than rushing effectiveness. *cites evidence in support of claim*

The Horde: well, thats just your opinion man.

AdamJT13: Again, that is a fact, not an opinion.

The Horde: WHY DO U HATE THE COWBOYS? YOU MUST BE AN EAGLES INTERLOPER. JEALOUS???

AdamJT13: *closes eyes, takes a deep breath, exhales*

Man this could be a webisode..or something. I would tune in just to see the dialogue...funny stuff..logic vs emotions always kills me.