[Huddle]

Schneed wrote:

Your entire argument centers around your inability to filter out co-variances when talking about statistics. You're basically hiding behind the fact that YOU personally can't see a difference between Bledsoe and Brunell's play, and the statistical co-variance argument is the perfect veil behind which you can hide your flimsy stance.

In the foregoing statement, you question my integrity but offer nothing as argument.

I will not dispute that lots of factors go into deciding the outcome of a game, and to focus in one one or two of those factors as if they're the end-all be-all would be short-sighted. But some factors are larger than others, and turnovers are the biggest.

So, you think you're right but, aside from that correlation between winning and the turnover ratio that we have already discussed, you have nothing new.

If you put Brunell and Bledsoe behind the same offensive line over the course of a season, Brunell would end up with fewer sacks.

Of course he would, I've already conceded that scramblers take fewer sacks than pocket passers. What the sack stats won't do is compare the two types of QBs on production given the same O line: one staying in the pocket to make more completions, the other abandoning the pocket early and often.