Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

GTripp,

According to that site's DPAR rankings, Brunell is better than:

Tom Brady
Eli Manning
Carson Palmer
Rex Grossman
Chad Pennington
Tony Romo
Matt Hasselbeck
Michael Vick

There goes that site's credibility. Please stop citing DPAR, DVOR, or anything from that site.

I've got a stat - 99.999999% of all stats cited on internet sites run by yahoos are B.S.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

GTripp,

According to that site's DPAR rankings, Brunell is better than:

Tom Brady
Eli Manning
Carson Palmer
Rex Grossman
Chad Pennington
Tony Romo
Matt Hasselbeck
Michael Vick

There goes that site's credibility. Please stop citing DPAR, DVOR, or anything from that site because, if your relying on those stats, you've got no real basis for your contentions.

I'm dissapointed.

It's not like I want you to come out and admit to me that Mark Brunell>Tom Brady. He's not. But if you are going to completely discredit a source, because either you don't understand what they are doing, or it goes against some preconceived notion that you have...thats rediculous.

They aren't perfect, but it's better than say, QB Rating (another stat in which Mark Brunell ranks ahead of Tom Brady, Eli Manning, Rex Grossman, Chad Pennington, Vick and Hasselbeck), because it tries to eliminate the factors a QB can't control.

And I don't even see what you are trying to say. Why CAN'T Brunell be better than those guys. Did he do something against the QB code? Not to say that he is better, but listing names doesn't make a guy better than Brunell.

I'm confused. Maybe I should discredit all stats while I'm at it. We can't have us being led to conclusions that disagree with common opinion now can we.

Actually, they have really good credibility...but I can't help but wonder if you are saying this just to try to win the arguement?

Either way, from a moderator on the warpath, I have come to expect a more open mind.

Whatever.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

They aren't perfect, but it's better than say, QB Rating (another stat in which Mark Brunell ranks ahead of Tom Brady, Eli Manning, Rex Grossman, Chad Pennington, Vick and Hasselbeck), because it tries to eliminate the factors a QB can't control.

And I don't even see what you are trying to say. Why CAN'T Brunell be better than those guys. Did he do something against the QB code? Not to say that he is better, but listing names doesn't make a guy better than Brunell.

You ask why can't Brunell be better than Brady, Manning, Grossman, Palmer, Pennington, Romo, Vick, and Hasselbeck? I can't believe you are actually asking that. I pray that you are not implying that he is better than them.

Either you are: (1) arguing that Brunell is better than those QBs; or (2) you concede that there is something wrong with those stats. So which is it?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

You ask why can't Brunell be better than Brady, Manning, Grossman, Palmer, Pennington, Romo, Vick, and Hasselbeck? I can't believe you are actually asking that. I pray that you are not implying that he is better than them.

Either you are: (1) arguing that Brunell is better than those QBs; or (2) you concede that there is something wrong with those stats. So which is it?

Neither. I think he's better than Grossman and Vick...and Romo its far far too early to tell.

I will say this, those stats are based on one season. So is Brunell better than any of those remaining guys? Not even close. Has he done his job this season as well as them to this point? Most accounts say yes.

There are always extra reasoning that go along with statistics.

Anyway, Brunell is better in QB rating than most of those guys, so at what point do we discredit all evidence and bicker about nothing? I've said many times that QB rating is a flawed stat, but I'm serious now, when you say that Tom Brady is having a better season than Brunell, what are you basing that on? Record alone? Considering he's one of 53 guys on the Pats, that's pretty weak. Or are you basing it on what you hear from talking heads around the league, and what you accept without challenging.

Don't get me wrong, I also believe Brady is better than Brunell. But this season, Brady isn't as good as he normally is, and Brunell is better than his career average.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Don't get me wrong, I also believe Brady is better than Brunell. But this season, Brady isn't as good as he normally is, and Brunell is better.

Just for clarity, are you saying Brunell was a better QB this year than Brady is right now?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Just for clarity, are you saying Brunell was a better QB this year than Brady is right now?

Sorry. I'm saying Brunell is better than Brunell's career average. Got better with age. My bad.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Sorry. I'm saying Brunell is better than Brunell's career average. Got better with age. My bad.

Brunell is not like a fine wine, he hasn't gotten better with age. I can't believe you're actually saying he's better now than he was when he was younger.

And, in any event, we're not comparing Mark to Mark, we're comparing him to other QBs and what constitutes an acceptable level of performance.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Neither. I think he's better than Grossman and Vick...and Romo its far far too early to tell.

I will say this, those stats are based on one season. So is Brunell better than any of those remaining guys? Not even close. Has he done his job this season as well as them to this point? Most accounts say yes.

Most accounts say Brunell has done as good of a job as those other QBs? I'm not sure what other "accounts" you're referring to.

I supplement statistically analyses with my eyes, and I've seen enough games of all of those QBs to know that Brunell has not been doing a good job and I think the overwhelming majority of other eyes concur.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I supplement statistically analyses with my eyes, and I've seen enough games of all of those QBs to know that Brunell has not been doing a good job and I think the overwhelming majority of other eyes concur.

Ditto. I'm even a person that puts a lot of stock in statistics, but the moment a wannabe professor that probably has no other understanding of the game of football other than the numbers, tells me that Mark Brunell is doing his job better than Carson Palmer and Tom Brady, is the moment I tell him he's retarded.

Instead of throwing around numbers, how about you use your eyes, and watch the performance on the field. A six yard completion on 3rd and 9 looks really nice for the passing statistics, but it does absolutely dick as far as actually winning the game. Throwing the ball away on third and long may prevent an interception, but again, give up plays don't put points on the board.

You know what happens when you put too much stock into statistics? You end up losing a close game to the Redskins, because some stupid card told you it was statistically smart to go for a two point conversion, instead of kicking the extra point in the first quarter of the game.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

Ditto. I'm even a person that puts a lot of stock in statistics, but the moment a wannabe professor that probably has no other understanding of the game of football other than the numbers, tells me that Mark Brunell is doing his job better than Carson Palmer and Tom Brady, is the moment I tell him he's retarded.

Instead of throwing around numbers, how about you use your eyes, and watch the performance on the field. A six yard completion on 3rd and 9 looks really nice for the passing statistics, but it does absolutely dick as far as actually winning the game. Throwing the ball away on third and long may prevent an interception, but again, give up plays don't put points on the board.

You know what happens when you put too much stock into statistics? You end up losing a close game to the Redskins, because some stupid card told you it was statistically smart to go for a two point conversion, instead of kicking the extra point in the first quarter of the game.

Statistics should never override common sense...but then again if you think common sense tells you to bench the league's 10th rated QB, you should probably check which side of the arguement you want to be on.

Look, I have no problem with your position on the issue, but you've never been one to debate me really. You like to look at issues on the surface and draw conclusions quickly and then be stubborn about them when they are questioned.

I disagree with that philosophy.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Either way, from a moderator on the warpath, I have come to expect a more open mind.

Whatever.

SGG has had an extremely open mind with you. He does with everyone in fact.

Look, I agree with you that Brunell isn't doing as poorly as most think. And I think it's misleading to say he doesn't spread the ball around. Now while I think long-term JC will be a great QB I don't expect a sudden explosion of points right away. However, I hope I'm dead wrong. I hope Campbell is a huge difference and we start getting convincing Ws. I think a lot of other Brunell supporters feel the same way, because above all they are Redskins fans.

But I think it's becoming increasingly clear that wins don't seem to matter to you. It's like you're personally offended by the change at QB and want nothing more than to be proven right. it's like you're hoping Campbell plays poorly and we lose so you can come back with more DPAR, DVOA, DVDA, DUMB stats to say "I told you so"

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

SGG has had an extremely open mind with you. He does with everyone in fact.

Look, I agree with you that Brunell isn't doing as poorly as most think. And I think it's misleading to say he doesn't spread the ball around. Now while I think long-term JC will be a great QB I don't expect a sudden explosion of points right away. However, I hope I'm dead wrong. I hope Campbell is a huge difference and we start getting convincing Ws. I think a lot of other Brunell supporters feel the same way, because above all they are Redskins fans.

But I think it's becoming increasingly clear that wins don't seem to matter to you. It's like you're personally offended by the change at QB and want nothing more than to be proven right. it's like you're hoping Campbell plays poorly and we lose so you can come back with more DPAR, DVOA, DVDA, DUMB stats to say "I told you so"

I don't know why you'd say that wins don't matter to me. I think you have me completely wrong. I'm trying to bring up intelligent discussion about the QB conundrum. Food for thought if you will.

SGG has been cool about the whole QB debate, maybe a tad reactionary (every game his position on Brunell seemed to change), but nothing if not fair. So I've said this to him already, but I was calling out him for making a close minded (and out of character) post, NOT for being a close minded person. He, in general, is one of the more open minded members on this fourm, and to clarify, I think he's a great moderator.

Why would you say that I hope Campbell plays poorly? I'll defend him too if he gets unjustly attacked. I'm on record saying that. I believe, due to readings i've made, that Jason Campbell will grow to be a great NFL QB. But grow is the key term.

The point of metrics like DVOA and DPAR is not to say "I told you so." It's to try to assess performance based on eliminating factors that those players can't control. I don't know what is so horrible about that. I'm not the I told you so kind of person...never have been. When the team is losing, tensions are high. If we were as good as we were supposed to be, this would not be an issue. But is it a really horrible thing if we were to question things before accepting them as fact. I personally think not.

If anyone does, it could be difficult to get along with me over the rest of the season. I'll apoligize in advance right here.

If anyone has something to say to me, feel free to PM me, I'm here daily.

No hard feelings.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

SGG has been cool about the whole QB debate, maybe a tad reactionary (every game his position on Brunell seemed to change), but nothing if not fair. So I've said this to him already, but I was calling out him for making a close minded (and out of character) post, NOT for being a close minded person. He, in general, is one of the more open minded members on this fourm, and to clarify, I think he's a great moderator

Not to be a smart ass, but I don't think you actually mean that I am "reactionary" (an ultra right-winger who hates liberals). If you mean that I've been somewhat inconsistent on Brunell (aka a "flip-flopper"), I must clarify my position because I think I've been consistent, not dogmatic.

I have had a major problem with Brunell since the start of the season (hence my posts in these threads). That said, I: (1) am willing to recognize that he's done good things for this organization (hence my "thanks Mark Brunell" thread); and (2) think he's played a few good games this season (hence my "give props to Mark Brunell" thread).

I don't think I'm being inconsistent by calling for Brunell's benching, but recognizing that he is not Adolf Hitler re-born (as I think some posters are close to doing) and that he's done good things for us and occasionally plays a good game. I think that's just being fair to the guy. I'm not going to be unwilling to admit it when he plays well. But just because he plays well one week and I recognize it, I don't think I've abandoned my general position that he is sub-par.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Either way, from a moderator on the warpath, I have come to expect a more open mind.

Whatever.

First, I've had a very open mind. Like TAFKAS, I have consistently said that Brunell isn't as bad as people think. I have also said that he's not nearly as good as you claim. You may or may not recall that I started a thread praising Brunell after the Dallas game, but I did. I have also taken issue with people who have claimed that Brunell is worse than Andrew Walter, etc. So, ironically enough, I cannot understand why you claim that I do not have an open mind.

Second, I have repeatedly said that you are entitled to your opinion and that I respect that you try to back up your arguments. I also, however, have repeatedly said that I disagree with you. Those two notions are not irreconciliable.

Third, I do take serious issue with the kinds of stats you have cited. You said that they are respected, but I have yet to be proven that. Who else cites those stats? They come from some obscure website. Moreover, I disagree with their rankings of QBs based on some obscure formula. Even you seem to disagree with some of the rankings. So, I have no idea how you can challenge my refusal to accept such stats when you do not completely accept them either.

Fourth, it seems to me that you are intensely annoyed with people who bash Brunell and are, therefore, totally determined to defend Brunell at every turn. I understand and agree with your contention that he's not as bad as people make him out to be. But I disagree with how you appear to refuse to concede that anything is wrong with Brunell.

Finally, I've repeatedly stated that you are a valued member of thewarpath. So, please don't take my disagreements with you personally.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Third, I do take serious issue with the kinds of stats you have cited. You said that they are respected, but I have yet to be proven that. Who else cites those stats? They come from some obscure website. Moreover, I disagree with their rankings of QBs based on some obscure formula. Even you seem to disagree with some of the rankings. So, I have no idea how you can challenge my refusal to accept such stats when you do not completely accept them either.

Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings double as the power rankings on FOXSports.com. At least they used to before this season, but they are still posted on FOXSports.com.

The same authors of the site are also the authors of Pro Football Prospectus. It's a statistical evidence book that has drawn rave reviews from trustworthy experts like Ron Jaworski, and is I believe it to be the highest selling football book (not sure if thats by $ or by copies sold).

But if that doesn't make them important, I don't know what does.