Positives about hiring Norv

[dbair1967]

You can't combine stats for 2 years and say both years stats were really good. Williams' 2002 stats inflate his 2003 stats when combined.

Terry Allen's best season was in 96. His 2nd best season was in 92 before Turner.

Davis's best season were in 2001 and 2003 without Turner.

1999 was Davis' best season dude...1405 yds, 4.8yd avg and 17 rushing tds

and Terry Allen went over 1300 yds in 95 and 96 in Washington...1201 is what he did in 1992

David

 

[theogt]

Stats support it as well. All you have is that Gore should have been better because he was in his second year and you opinion that goes against you r Client's. This would be an easy day for me.

Gore improved his YPC slightly in his 2nd year. There are two potential causes: (1) He improved in his 2nd year, and (2) Norv Turner.

The fact is that the majority of players improve in their 2nd year. I could show this statistically but it would take entirely too much time tonight.

Also, you tried to show that Norv improved the overall YPC of the team from 2005 to 2006. I showed that this was statistically the result of Gore having more carries.

Your entire argument is based on one quote from a player. Surprisingly, I've never heard a player badmouth a coach after having a good year. People like to be modest and credit others for their success. It means noting in terms of this debate.

 

[theogt]

1999 was Davis' best season dude...1405 yds, 4.8yd avg and 17 rushing tds

and Terry Allen went over 1300 yds in 95 and 96 in Washington...1201 is what he did in 1992

David

You're right. 1999 was Davis's best season. Out of his top 3 seasons, 2 were without Norv Turner. Hardly a sign that Turner was the reason Davis was good.

I already stated that 96 was Allen's best year. His stats in 92 are better than 95 however. Better YPC and more TDs.

At most you could say that RBs that have had successful careers also had successful years under Norv Turner.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

Gore improved his YPC slightly in his 2nd year. There are two potential causes: (1) He improved in his 2nd year, and (2) Norv Turner.

The fact is that the majority of players improve in their 2nd year. I could show this statistically but it would take entirely too much time tonight.

Also, you tried to show that Norv improved the overall YPC of the team from 2005 to 2006. I showed that this was statistically the result of Gore having more carries.

Your entire argument is based on one quote from a player. Surprisingly, I've never heard a player badmouth a coach after having a good year. People like to be modest and credit others for their success. It means noting in terms of this debate.

Norv's system always features one back and allows him to get virtually all of the carries. It is RB friendly and runners having good years is a constant in his scheme (see Gore, Ricky Williams, Stephen Davis, Terry Allen and Emmitt). The rest of your argument above is just speculation, as most running backs do enjoy success in their second year, but it is not a given. The same with your "being modest" argument. If you are basing it on speculation, then I and most everyone else would take the player's word over yours any day.

Gore is a good back. He will be successful in the NFL. Norv helped him be better. YPC supports it, Gore believes it.

 

[theogt]

The speculative position is that Gore's YPC increased slightly in his 2nd season because of Norv and not because he improved in his 2nd season like most other athletes. If you can't see why this is true, God help you.

 

[Bob Dole]

The fact that you're all having a five page discussion about Norval and whether he helps a RB's YPC is pathetically sad.

WHO CARES?

The offense is fine. Even if Norval was the offensive genius people tout him to be (which he isn't), why is he needed? This team had one of the top offenses in the NFL last season. This team has an offense fully capable of winning a Superbowl. This team needs help on DEFENSE. Julius Jones is a ***** and runs as such, expecting him to be the "next Frank Gore" is laughable, although Bob Dole knows all the retards here will be posting that all summer.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

The speculative position is that Gore's YPC increased slightly in his 2nd season because of Norv and not because he improved in his 2nd season like most other athletes. If you can't see why this is true, God help you.

Gore improved. Some of that is on him, but some of that is on Turner. If Turner is so bad, why didn't Gore regress or stay the same instead of go up almost 1/2 yard per carry? I have presented the only constant, which is Gore agreeing with me. You are arguing against him for some reason, with Gore not agreeing with you. In his HOF interview with NFL.com, Troy Aikman stated that Emmitt Smith credits Norv for getting his career in the right direction as well. I'm sure you will disagree with Emmitt as well, though.

 

[theogt]

Gore improved. Some of that is on him, but some of that is on Turner. If Turner is so bad, why didn't Gore regress or stay the same instead of go up almost 1/2 yard per carry? I have presented the only constant, which is Gore agreeing with me. You are arguing against him for some reason, with Gore not agreeing with you. In his HOF interview with NFL.com, Troy Aikman stated that Emmitt Smith credits Norv for getting his career in the right direction as well. I'm sure you will disagree with Emmitt as well, though.

Wow, now your argument is that because Gore didn't regress in his 2nd season, Norv must not suck.

This is truly bizarre.

 

[Bob Dole]

Gore improved. Some of that is on him, but some of that is on Turner. If Turner is so bad, why didn't Gore regress or stay the same instead of go up almost 1/2 yard per carry? I have presented the only constant, which is Gore agreeing with me. You are arguing against him for some reason, with Gore not agreeing with you. In his HOF interview with NFL.com, Troy Aikman stated that Emmitt Smith credits Norv for getting his career in the right direction as well. I'm sure you will disagree with Emmitt as well, though.

Joe Montana credits Paul Hackett, one of the worst coaches in the modern era of football on any level, with much of his success.

Wanna hire Paul Hackett?

If you really think Turner had anything to do with Gore's success,you need to get your head checked. Of course Gore will complement him, do you expect him to say, "No he didn't have anything to do with my success, it's all me."

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

Wow, now your argument is that because Gore didn't regress in his 2nd season, Norv must not suck.

This is truly bizarre.

Well, I tried using logic, stats and the players own opinion, but nothing seems to sink in with you. You are bringing in stats that are actually supportive of Norv and say it is all because of Gore, with no other basis than you feel that way. You aren't the brightest bulb, but I'll give you credit that you try your hardest to shine through that dull finish.

 

[theogt]

Well, I tried using logic, stats and the players own opinion, but nothing seems to sink in with you. You are bringing in stats that are actually supportive of Norv and say it is all because of Gore, with no other basis than you feel that way. You aren't the brightest bulb, but I'll give you credit that you try your hardest to shine through that dull finish.

You didn't use logic. You used an opinion. You didn't use stats. You showed nothing that indicates that Norv is responsible for Gore's improved YPC other than Gore's quote. That's neither logic nor stats. You're grasping for straws because you made a claim before looking into the facts.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

Joe Montana credits Paul Hackett, one of the worst coaches in the modern era of football on any level, with much of his success.

Wanna hire Paul Hackett?

If you really think Turner had anything to do with Gore's success,you need to get your head checked. Of course Gore will complement him, do you expect him to say, "No he didn't have anything to do with my success, it's all me."

No, but I trust Joe's opinion more than yours.

The stats say that running backs do well in Norv's system. if you want to say Norv will stink as a coach, hey you have a good basis, but I have a good basis for saying he has a good system for running backs and utilizes them well. Yet again, Gore had a great season and credited Turner, who was his coordinator. Emmitt felt that Turner was responsible for developing him. Terry Allen had his best years under him. Stephen Davis had great years under him. Ricky Williams had one of his greatest season's under him, Gore had a great year under him. Notice the constant?

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

You didn't use logic. You used an opinion. You didn't use stats. You showed nothing that indicates that Norv is responsible for Gore's improved YPC other than Gore's quote. That's neither logic nor stats. You're grasping for straws because you made a claim before looking into the facts.

The facts support my claim, if you feel they support yours as well, then that is your opinion (albeit a pretty bad one). The one thing that is not disputable is the player's opinion, which sides with me. That is better than your opinion. You have been grasping for straws since I presented that, but I'm having fun, so keep going.

 

[theogt]

The facts support my claim, if you feel they support yours as well, then that is your opinion (albeit a pretty bad one). The one thing that is not disputable is the player's opinion, which sides with me. That is better than your opinion. You have been grasping for straws since I presented that, but I'm having fun, so keep going.

Ok. I will break this down for you.

Occurrence: Frank Gore's stats improved from his 1st year to his 2nd.

Claim: This is the result of Norv Turner.

Support: Gore said that Turner improved his game.

You have no other support for you claim. NONE. No facts. Nothing.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

Ok. I will break this down for you.

Occurrence: Frank Gore's stats improved from his 1st year to his 2nd.

Claim: This is the result of Norv Turner.

Support: Gore said that Turner improved his game.

You have no other support for you claim. NONE. No facts. Nothing.

Occurence: The stats say that Gore did better in 06l.

Claim: You say that this was solely because of Gore and had nothing to do with Turner

Support: Nothing

 

[theogt]

Occurence: The stats say that Gore did better as well.

Claim: You say that this was solely because of Gore

Support: Nothing

Are you trying to argue that Norv was the cause of Gore's stats getting better because Gore's stats were better?

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

Occurence: The stats say that Gore did better in 06l.

Claim: You say that this was solely because of Gore and had nothing to do with Turner

Support: Nothing

You have nothing else, I have a runner who thinks with me. He is a smart guy.

 

[Bob Dole]

No, but I trust Joe's opinion more than yours.

The stats say that running backs do well in Norv's system. if you want to say Norv will stink as a coach, hey you have a good basis, but I have a good basis for saying he has a good system for running backs and utilizes them well. Yet again, Gore had a great season and credited Turner, who was his coordinator. Emmitt felt that Turner was responsible for developing him. Terry Allen had his best years under him. Stephen Davis had great years under him. Ricky Williams had one of his greatest season's under him, Gore had a great year under him. Notice the constant?

Terry Allen had great seasons without Norval (including maybe his best season, in Minnesota)

Emitt Smith had great seasons without Norval (including his best season, in 1995)

Stephen Davis had great seasons without Norval (including his highest yardage season, in Carolina)

Ricky Williams had great seasons without Norval.

Frank Gore naturally progressed in his second season, like most players do, there's no doubt in Bob Dole's mind he would have had the same success without Norval.

Notice the constant?

THEY'RE GREAT RB'S.

They were great with Norval and great without him. They're just great players. Giving Norval credit for them is ludicrous.

 

[theogt]

Occurence: The stats say that Gore did better in 06l.

Claim: You say that this was solely because of Gore and had nothing to do with Turner

Support: Nothing

Oh, and here's how my argument breaks down.

Occurrence: Gore improved from his 1st year to his 2nd.

Claim: This is the result of him gaining experience and growing as a player.

Support: The overwhelming majority of players improve in their 2nd year because they gain experience and grow as a player. It doesn't show a causal relationship but the correlative relationship is so strong that it seems obvious.

My argument has years and years of statistical evidence. Yours? One person's opinion. I'm sorry but your argument is a joke.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

I'm telling you that Gore produced in a system that typically allows running backs to excel. Turner teaches them things that make them better players. that is what coaches do. Gore believes it and credits him for it. Gore does not side with you. Your star witness failed you and yet you still argue on. Good for you!