Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rodgers Gambling Problem

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by 3irty1 View Post
    Offense isn't like defense where you make drastic adjustments. By nature the offense is imposing their will on the defense, the defense is the side that doesn't know what's coming. On offense your preparation, your game plan is all you've got. Abandoning it would mean going to plan B but if you have a plan B that must have been part of your game plan anyways.

    I still think the difference is just Arod but the stats are cherry picked and bogus. The down by 9+ and the 4th quarter comeback stast have little in common other than Rodgers is an outlier in both. I'm not convinced it has anything to do with averting risk to a fault.
    Its a fair point about D countering the O. However, one of the reasons (and we might be up to ten at this point) for the famous 15 scripted plays was to suss out how the D was going to react to the things the 49ers wanted to do.

    The offense must then adjust too. And if your still in the hole, its the plays the QB always feels he can make, some teammate input and pulling a surpass off the back page of the call sheet.

    I do think one structural issue is resolved with Lacy and Starks and Harris on board. There will be less empty backfield and that will make both running and passing easier depending on how the D adjusts.
    Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

    Comment


    • #47
      Holding the ball longer is a risk just as throwing the ball into coverage is a risk. Without data on which risk has a better return, what is the point?

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by sharpe1027 View Post
        Holding the ball longer is a risk just as throwing the ball into coverage is a risk. Without data on which risk has a better return, what is the point?
        Wow, that is exactly what I was thinking but couldn't put it in words. Tou did it in your first sentence! +2!
        --
        Imagine for a moment a world without hypothetical situations...

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by sharpe1027 View Post
          Holding the ball longer is a risk just as throwing the ball into coverage is a risk. Without data on which risk has a better return, what is the point?
          You can just stop being sensible and ruining a good argument.
          Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

          Comment


          • #50
            In 1994, I had only been watching the NFL for a couple of years. I lived in Hawaii, where the closest thing to a home team we had was the Pro Bowl — which pret…


            Well, some better data here in this attempt. More specific anyway. This is the same guy who pointed out that too few INTs might point out that Rodgers takes too few chances when down late.

            Here he has some data on Rodger's 4th quarter success getting TDs. The point differential should week out when M3 is playing for a 53 yard Mason Crosby FG.




            Then the counter-factual. Rodgers interceptions grouped by size of score gap. He says he is prepared to eat crow, but ...



            As others pointed out, we are still only looking at one kind of risk (INTs) and not running with the ball, rolling out or holding it to find an open receiver. However, the big fourth quarter discrepancy here might point out another unique situation where more risk is warranted. This analysis also is limited to a comparison only with Peyton.
            Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

            Comment


            • #51
              Statistical charts are worthless half the time.

              The second chart above is for all 2ND HALF drives. That skews things greatly. Being down by 10 points in the first 10 minutes of the 3rd quarter is a hell of a lot different than the last 10 minutes of the 4th quarter...but this charts lumps both together? Meaningless unless you do a far greater dive into the numbers to establish WHEN these QBs were behind by 9+ points.
              It's such a GOOD feeling...13 TIME WORLD CHAMPIONS!!

              Comment


              • #52
                I see a frontrunner.
                When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro ~Hunter S.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by King Friday View Post
                  Statistical charts are always worthless half the time.
                  Yogi fixed it for you.
                  Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Here is a good response to the last 538 article: http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/20...utch-comebacks

                    1. Morris used four games in his sample in which Aaron Rodgers did not start.

                    2. Morris did not include any playoff games.

                    3. Several game mentioned where Rodgers mounted a huge comeback but was undone specifically by ST and Defense late, as well as the really weird FG strategy in the Delhomme Panthers game when Steve Smith decided to remind everyone he was very good and the Packer special teams rewarded McCarthy's confidence in them by surrendering back to back long KO returns. Also, bonus desperation INT.

                    4. The huge amount of games (15 of 21) that occurred early in his career.
                    Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X