Huge Reason we Won

[Nightman]

*rushing effectiveness has little correlation to winning.

How you still can’t understand the argument after having it explained to you literally dozens of times is amazing to me. If you disagreed with he actual argument, it would be one thing. But you don’t even understand the argument in the first place, as this post just reinforced, again.

this was actually one of the rare games that DAL won despite SEA passing more efficiently

According to @AdamJT13 it had been something like 70 - 2 passing better wins

 

[Runwildboys]

Pretty harsh.

THe reality is TOP and running aren't the deciding factor. It's scoring TDs. Holding the ball forever and kicking FG's or turning it over is worthless.

When you have a guy like Wilson who gets better as the game goes on, ToP is monster, as it gives him less opportunity to get in a groove.

 

[Idgit]

this was actually one of the rare games that DAL won despite SEA passing more efficiently

According to @AdamJT13 it had been something like 70 - 2 passing better wins

I thought it might have been—because the defense bailed us out after Dak’s pick, right?

 

[viman96]

TOP.

Not sure why no one is talking about it, but it was a huge reason we won yesterday as well as several other times this year.

Our first drive was like 6 min. SEA 3 n out. Then more TOP.

At the end, the SEA O had a horrific time getting traction and our D was kept fresh.

IMO it was more than TOP. Look at the huge difference in 1st downs as well. Dallas' offense was staying of the field by moving the chains while Seattle was going 3 and out.

 

[Runwildboys]

*rushing effectiveness has little correlation to winning.

How you still can’t understand the argument after having it explained to you literally dozens of times is amazing to me. If you disagreed with he actual argument, it would be one thing. But you don’t even understand the argument in the first place, as this post just reinforced, again.

Apparently I missed something.

 

[aikemirv]

Seahawks fans and media are roasting their OC on Twitter for not putting the ball in Russell's hand.

Well that's a fact for sure. That was just stupid to continue trying to run.

We did wear them down. Zeke had some of his best success in the 4th

 

[conner01]

TOP is a down stream effect of a good defense and a ball control offense, we have both.

Ironically both teams had 12 drives
We ran better so had more TOP
We didn’t do well on 3rd down but they didn’t either
Had we converted 3 more key 3rd downs they game could have been over sooner

 

[cern]

There was no stopping some of those. Should have stopped some.

True. Their wr's made some outstanding catches even when covered by blankets.

 

[Nightman]

I thought it might have been—because the defense bailed us out after Dak’s pick, right?

It was the INT and the big play to Lockett that skewed things in Wilson's favor

The theory still predicts victory at an 80% level so it isn't foolproof but it is the best indicator by far

Better than TOs, TOP or Rushing Yards

 

[G2]

It's important and a part of winning games, but we've lost games where we crushed TOP, so it's not everything.

 

[conner01]

TOP in this game had more to do with defense than offense
We stopped their run and they had short time drives several times
We actually wasn’t great in converting 3rd downs which generally is the key to TOP

 

[visionary]

*rushing effectiveness has little correlation to winning.

How you still can’t understand the argument after having it explained to you literally dozens of times is amazing to me. If you disagreed with he actual argument, it would be one thing. But you don’t even understand the argument in the first place, as this post just reinforced, again.

You obviously have no understanding of statistics and just piggy back off Adam because it suits your agenda

For starters, read up on correlation, univariate logistic regression and multivariate logistic regression, and Cstatistic

Then you will begin to have an understanding why an isolated stat like correlation of one variable with another picked out of a hundred other correlations without correction for confounders has absolutely no basis for drawing reasonable conclusions. Esp when the underlying data is flawed.

I explained this in the other thread a few months back where Adam basically had to admit he has no idea how data is entered and what is the basis for collecting certain data and not other data, that real data was 'too difficult to collect' and he does not even do the stats, he just copies and pasted them from his mothers basement . Yet he's happy to draw conclusions from these incomplete and clearly inaccurate data

But of course, someone with you're limited intelligence will have a tough time fathoming this

 

[Idgit]

Apparently I missed something.

Like three years and a hundred or so threads of patient explanation.

In short, visionary can’t carry Adam’s intellectual jock strap in an argument but thinks there’s an actual debate on the rushing effectiveness correlation to winning in the NFL topic despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Primarily because he just doesn’t understand the explanations he’s been patiently given.

 

[ItzKelz]

TOP.

Not sure why no one is talking about it, but it was a huge reason we won yesterday as well as several other times this year.

Our first drive was like 6 min. SEA 3 n out. Then more TOP.

At the end, the SEA O had a horrific time getting traction and our D was kept fresh.

Sounds like the offense and defense were feeding off each other early.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

Well that's a fact for sure. That was just stupid to continue trying to run.

We did wear them down. Zeke had some of his best success in the 4th

Hell, he was on fire for a min......then they when back to the run.

 

[32BellyOption]

TOP is huge.

However, if we want to win the super bowl, we need to score early with the large TOP.

Our lack of scoring allows teams to stick around for far too long

Gotta score TD’s on those long,
clock consuming drives. For as good as we played our margin of error was slim. Gotta bury teams in the playoffs when you have a chance.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

When you have a guy like Wilson who gets better as the game goes on, ToP is monster, as it gives him less opportunity to get in a groove.

To me he is so much better in the two minute offense....I think forcing him into having to score quickly actually benefits him.

 

[Bobhaze]

Dallas was simply more physical in every phase of the game. In the playoffs, usually the most physically dominant teams win. The Cowboys can play that way now. They couldn’t 5 years ago.

 

[Idgit]

You obviously have no understanding of statistics and just piggy back off Adam because it suits your agenda

For starters, read up on correlation, univariate logistic regression and multivariate logistic regression, and Cstatistic

Then you will begin to have an understanding why an isolated stat like correlation of one variable with another picked out of a hundred other correlations without correction for confounders has absolutely no basis for drawing reasonable conclusions

But of course, someone with your limited intelligence will have a tough time fathoming this

Dazzling. And yet, you still managed to describe the actual argument completely wrong in your initial post. Again. Despite what you just googled. I’m flabbergasted over here.

 

[Runwildboys]

Like three years and a hundred or so threads of patient explanation.

In short, visionary can’t carry Adam’s intellectual jock strap in an argument but thinks there’s an actual debate on the rushing effectiveness correlation to winning in the NFL topic despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Primarily because he just doesn’t understand the explanations he’s been patiently given.

I guess I'd have to see the arguments.