On Blache

[SmootSmack]

I think it's in the fine print that we're getting this debate. In my opinion, and I think skinsfan69's, if you have 1st and 10 and three plays later you're punting at 4th and 4 the fact that you just gained 6 yards is kinda moot. But for GTripp, that's 6 yards that the offense has moved the ball.

[maroonandblack30]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think it's in the fine print that we're getting this debate. In my opinion, and I think skinsfan69's, if you have 1st and 10 and three plays later you're punting at 4th and 4 the fact that you just gained 6 yards is kinda moot. But for GTripp, that's 6 yards that the offense has moved the ball.

I think that is an excellent summation!

Some people just look at things in totally different ways. No harm.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think it's in the fine print that we're getting this debate. In my opinion, and I think skinsfan69's, if you have 1st and 10 and three plays later you're punting at 4th and 4 the fact that you just gained 6 yards is kinda moot. But for GTripp, that's 6 yards that the offense has moved the ball.

I don't get what you are saying here.

Of course 6 yards is 6 yards. But that's also a three and out, which happens too infrequently with this team to say we are a top five defense. We do force a lot of punts, which is good, but not until the ball has gone too far down the field, which is bad.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I don't get what you are saying here.

Of course 6 yards is 6 yards. But that's also a three and out, which happens too infrequently with this team to say we are a top five defense. We do force a lot of punts, which is good, but not until the ball has gone too far down the field, which is bad.

You said there is absolutely no evidence that the offense has gone three and out on multiple occassions and failed to advance field position. I'm just trying to figure out why you would say that. Or maybe now the debate is over what you mean by "too infrequently"

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

You said there is absolutely no evidence that the offense has gone three and out on multiple occassions and failed to advance field position. I'm just trying to figure out why you would say that. Or maybe now the debate is over what you mean by "too infrequently"

I may be totally off here but I thought he meant to say frequently. cause it happens all the time. 3 and out. Infrequently would mean it does not happen all that often ...right?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

You said there is absolutely no evidence that the offense has gone three and out on multiple occassions and failed to advance field position. I'm just trying to figure out why you would say that. Or maybe now the debate is over what you mean by "too infrequently"

You can't measure Zorn's ball control offense without noting the astounding effects on time of possession. Too many people ignore this, by claiming it goes three and out all the time.

If we assume a league average offense is the baseline for how many three and outs are acceptable (and don't we have to?), then it's factually incorrect to claim that they go three and out "too much". Our offense is one of the very best in the NFL on our side of the 50. Our problems come when the field shrinks and all of a sudden we get hit by negative plays.

Then there are some people who argue that we just as well might be going three and out. These people are wrong.

Some people confuse going three and out sometimes for going three and out always. I think these fans are vastly misinformed, and maybe it has something to do with where they are getting their information. So there you have it.

(Bonus points if you got the reference in that last sentence).

[Hail to the Redskins]

Hey look GTripp, it's the holiday season and even if it weren't, I want you to know I never meant to personally attack you throughout our debate (I may have sounded harsh at times, but I felt like I was defending my own level of intelligence and analysis).

Personally, I think one thing that is great about this site is that it's a place to come and vent as Redskins fans and also delve into intellecual banter about the current events revolving around the team. But when you make comments like people "poorly" try to dispute you... I get irritated all over again.

You say, "Remember Hail, the only thing I ever said you were flat out wrong on was when you said PPG is the only stat that matters. I proved this pretty convincingly. And you never really disputed that."

REALLY???? HUH????

Let me just remind you of a point I made that showed you didn't make such a CLEAR argument that PPG don't matter as much as points per drive and that we are average at best in this regard...

You said...
"But you'll also notice that we rank 10th in points per drive, and 12th in TDs per drive. Now look at the numbers. We are closer to #25 (Jacksonville) in points per drive than we are to #1 (Baltimore), and we are closer to # 26 (Oakland) in TDs per drive than we are to #1 (Pittsburgh)."

I said...
* How exactly is 10th in the league closer to 25th than 1st? How is being in the top 10 bad? or top 12 even? out of 32 teams, that's CERTAINLY not "middle of the pack" and DEFINITELY not close to 25th.

Also, you know we are DEFINITELY higher in the top 10 after this passed week in "your" category. So this argument solidfies the fact that we have a good defense.

You DEFIN ITELY haven't even come CLOSE to definitely proving me wrong on even ONE point... ESPECIALLY points per game allowed.


I'll finish with this nugget:

ONLY ONE, count that ONE, team in the top 17 in PPG allowed is out of the playoff hunt besides us... the Cleveland Browns (Their offense hasn't scored a TD in 5 games).

Is that not significant????

[Hail to the Redskins]

I'm sorry, but I have to address this.

GTripp, you come off as so smug and pompous in one breath and then COMPLETELY discredit yourself in the next with the insane amount of contridictions you spew.

Perfect example:

You say this... "I suggest you look at these drive stats before you post anymore. It takes the TOP argument off the table (but not the field position argument). You'll notice the Redskins defense ranks first in punts per drive. Obviously, that's good, and it's a big component of why we give up so few points per game: no team forces more punts than the Redskins. But you'll also notice that we rank 10th in points per drive, and 12th in TDs per drive. Now look at the numbers. We are closer to #25 (Jacksonville) in points per drive than we are to #1 (Baltimore), and we are closer to # 26 (Oakland) in TDs per drive than we are to #1 (Pittsburgh).
This isn't even including the fact that we are in the top seven in Ave. Starting field position.
Here's the point: when you break the points per game stat down, you realize that we're really not that good at preventing points."



Then you spew on about our offense being "one of the best in the league" at ball control??

Using those SAME EXACT STATS from YOUR SOURCE you will see that our offense was ranked 16th in yards per drive, 27th in points per drive, and 28th in TDs per drive. (and these were the rankings BEFORE that incredible offensive output Sunday)

Basically, being 10th in points allowed per drive is terrible, comparable to Jax and Oakland, but our offense being ranked 16th in yards per drive is pretty damned awesome....

EH??

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Hail to the Redskins

Then you spew on about our offense being "one of the best in the league" at ball control??

Using those SAME EXACT STATS from YOUR SOURCE you will see that our offense was ranked 16th in yards per drive, 27th in points per drive, and 28th in TDs per drive. (and these were the rankings BEFORE that incredible offensive output Sunday)

Basically, being 10th in points allowed per drive is terrible, comparable to Jax and Oakland, but our offense being ranked 16th in yards per drive is pretty damned awesome....

EH??

Hey you clicked the link!! Yay! I thought I'd never see this day!

I don't know what you're saying here. By the same measures that says our defense isn't that good at preventing touchdowns, we're terrible at actually scoring touchdowns. AND THAT's ALL VERY TRUE.

But the offense does a lot of things well that isn't scoring touchdowns/points. It moves the ball out of it's own end, chewing up yards AND time, and it doesn't really ever turn the ball over (only Miami gives it up less).

All of those are very, very good things. Now, I don't think our offense is very good, simply because we have such problems getting into the end zone. It's a legitimate problem: that we take too many negative plays in opponents territory. And it's something that needs to be fixed.

But an offense that chews up time, yardage, and doesn't commit the big mistake is valuable even when it's not scoring points (which obviously, ours has not been). Isn't that the big picture here?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Hail to the Redskins

Let me just remind you of a point I made that showed you didn't make such a CLEAR argument that PPG don't matter as much as points per drive and that we are average at best in this regard...

You said...
"But you'll also notice that we rank 10th in points per drive, and 12th in TDs per drive. Now look at the numbers. We are closer to #25 (Jacksonville) in points per drive than we are to #1 (Baltimore), and we are closer to # 26 (Oakland) in TDs per drive than we are to #1 (Pittsburgh)."

I said...
* How exactly is 10th in the league closer to 25th than 1st? How is being in the top 10 bad? or top 12 even? out of 32 teams, that's CERTAINLY not "middle of the pack" and DEFINITELY not close to 25th.

I did say "Now look at the numbers." Which is something you did not do: actually click the link and look at the numbers. That's pretty critical for understanding why the quantity of TD/Pts per drive allowed by our defense was closer to the quantity of Oakland than Pittsburgh. It's right there, you just had to look. And you've proven conclusively that this concept wouldn't be lost on you had you actually looked at the numbers...so HA, got you red handed!

Being in the top 12 in TDs allowed per drive is NOT bad. Not at all. You can win 7-10 games a year with that sort of effort. Maybe more if you force more than 5 fumbles a year. But it's certainly not great, or even good. It's just meh.

Also, you know we are DEFINITELY higher in the top 10 after this passed week in "your" category. So this argument solidfies the fact that we have a good defense.

You DEFIN ITELY haven't even come CLOSE to definitely proving me wrong on even ONE point... ESPECIALLY points per game allowed.


I'll finish with this nugget:

ONLY ONE, count that ONE, team in the top 17 in PPG allowed is out of the playoff hunt besides us... the Cleveland Browns (Their offense hasn't scored a TD in 5 games).

Is that not significant????

One of the biggest problem's with your argument is that you were trying to prove that we were a top ten pass defense as if that was proof enough to dispute my argument. Note, I never tried to say we weren't a top ten pass defense. I said, that we weren't great. Both those things can be true. There are 8 pass defenses clear cut better than we are. As in, you can't make an argument that that's not true. So, sure, you can make a good argument that we're no. 9 or no. 10. But who cares? It's still pretty average, even if it's "top ten".

One of the biggest problems this whole time is you never really bothered disputing my point. Top ten does not necessarily equal good or great. It IMPLYS that, but then it's misleading. If you really disagreed with anything I was saying, you should have disputed that directly, instead of producing strong evidence that we were "top ten" without showing that we were actually good.

It may seem like I'm nitpicking here, but it's the difference between misleading people like maroonandblack, and coming to common ground. The logic that you were using that "look how high we rank, don't we have to be good?" wasn't correct. And I'm not sure how well I conveyed that point. We may both be right. We could be an average-below average pass defense, and top ten in total defense.

When I said that you weren't directly arguing a concise point, that's what I was trying to say.

And Cleveland giving up less PPG than 15 teams is a great point: that PPG is an overrated stat. Because that defense is garbage (and their offense is garbage, compared to ours. )

[Hail to the Redskins]

LOL

OK, so I think you have missed your calling. Psychologist or Lawyer would be perfect for you (if you aren't one indeed, that's be funny if you were, i'd understand you a lot more).

Talk about a conveluded point. You take facts that I point out that are clear EVIDENCE of a TOP defense in the NFL, and using only your words, no clear evidence to dispute, you twist things like this...

* "So, sure, you can make a good argument that we're no. 9 or no. 10. But who cares? It's still pretty average, even if it's "top ten"."

How in the heck does that last sentence make sense? Oh, I forgot, I am so simple-minded I just can't think on that profound level. Because to me it sounds like you are saying being in the top 10 is "pretty average". lol

or

* "Being in the top 12 in TDs allowed per drive is NOT bad. Not at all. You can win 7-10 games a year with that sort of effort."

OK, first of all YOU said it was bad! You are the one that used the stat in your argument. And also, the top 12 teams make the playoffs right?? So if you are a top 12 team, wouldn't being 9th or 10th best be the equivilent to a 10-11 win season?? VERY crafty at slyly placing a lower value to the top 10 again... with just your words.

or

* "If you really disagreed with anything I was saying, you should have disputed that directly, instead of producing strong evidence that we were "top ten" without showing that we were actually good."

I love this one. From a guy you digs so deep into stats he uses "yards per completion" and "points per drive" essentially comes the statement that stats so not matter at all. They are not direct evidence. They shouldn't be used to evaluate or show progress. I'll tell that to my students and they'll be ecstatic!

or

* "And Cleveland giving up less PPG than 15 teams is a great point: that PPG is an overrated stat."

Wow. So simply ignore the clear, undisutable evidence that PPG allowed has a HUGE impact on their success, you STILL try and find a way to weasel out of it by bringing up the ONE TEAM in the TOP 17 (ONE!) with a sub-.500 season and using THAT to say it's overrated?? HOLY CRAP!? LOL

and finally... my favorite...

* "misleading people like maroonandblack"

Misleading people?? By using easy to understand, widely recognized, FACTS... let me repeat FACTS... that I didn't twist, turn, or contradict, I mislead people??

When all you do in turn is use your verbose to embellish every argument, allowing all of the "pions" to ooh and ahh over your magnificence in being the authority on professional football.

Adolph Hitler. Jim Jones. These were people who used WORDS to mislead people into agreeing with them. I am just displaying stats/numbers/facts to support an argument of success. People do what they want with this information. I haven't persuaded anyone to "drink the kool-aid".


Also... on a side note...

I CLEARLY was pointing out how you contridicted yourself by USING YOUR STAT SITE. I went there. I went there before. And that site's stats only show the amazing contradiction in your agruments.... very weird statements at the beginning of your post made no sense and did NOT dispute your contradictions.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Hail to the Redskins

LOL

OK, so I think you have missed your calling. Psychologist or Lawyer would be perfect for you (if you aren't one indeed, that's be funny if you were, i'd understand you a lot more).

Talk about a conveluded point. You take facts that I point out that are clear EVIDENCE of a TOP defense in the NFL, and using only your words, no clear evidence to dispute, you twist things like this...

* "So, sure, you can make a good argument that we're no. 9 or no. 10. But who cares? It's still pretty average, even if it's "top ten"."

How in the heck does that last sentence make sense? Oh, I forgot, I am so simple-minded I just can't think on that profound level.

or

* "Being in the top 12 in TDs allowed per drive is NOT bad. Not at all. You can win 7-10 games a year with that sort of effort."

OK, first of all YOU said it was bad! You are the one that used the stat in your argument. And also, the top 12 teams make the playoffs right?? So if you are a top 12 team, wouldn't being 9th or 10th best be the equivilent to a 10-11 win season?? VERY crafty at slyly placing a lower value to the top 10 again... with just your words.

or

* "If you really disagreed with anything I was saying, you should have disputed that directly, instead of producing strong evidence that we were "top ten" without showing that we were actually good."

I love this one. From a guy you digs so deep into stats he uses "yards per completion" and "points per drive" essentially comes the statement that stats so not matter at all. They are not direct evidence. They shouldn't be used to evaluate or show progress. I'll tell that to my students and they'll be ecstatic!

or

* "And Cleveland giving up less PPG than 15 teams is a great point: that PPG is an overrated stat."

Wow. So simply ignore the clear, undisutable evidence that PPG allowed has a HUGE impact on their success, you STILL try and find a way to weasel out of it by bringing up the ONE TEAM in the TOP 17 (ONE!) with a sub-.500 season and using THAT to say it's overrated?? HOLY CRAP!? LOL

and finally... my favorite...

* "misleading people like maroonandblack"

Misleading people?? By using easy to understand, widely recognized, FACTS... let me repeat FACTS... that I didn't twist, turn, or contradict, I mislead people??

When all you do in turn is use your verbose to embellish every argument, allowing all of the "pions" to ooh and ahh over your magnificence in being the authority on professional football.

Adolph Hitler. Jim Jones. These were people who used WORDS to mislead people into agreeing with them.

Now you're just being obtuse. It's like you're trying to miss the point on purpose.

You've totally wasted this post. There's not one part of this where you make any sense. Why did you even bother responding?

But thanks for comparing me to Hitler and Jim Jones. I pray that you're slightly more open minded when it comes to your students, and don't go and play dumbass quite as easily. America's youth is in your hands, you know.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Hail to the Redskins

Also... on a side note...

I CLEARLY was pointing out how you contridicted yourself by USING YOUR STAT SITE. I went there. I went there before. And that site's stats only show the amazing contradiction in your agruments.... very weird statements at the beginning of your post made no sense and did NOT dispute your contradictions.

There was not a single contradiction involved. Taking a non-contradiction, that anyone can see is a non-contradiction, and calling it a contradiction does not make it one.

You're a teacher. You have no excuse to try to take this conversation and try to kill all logical balance within it. You've made a bunch of good points, and have arrived at a faulty conclusion. Now, you're trying to throw all class to the wind, and it's getting pretty sad IMO.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think it's in the fine print that we're getting this debate. In my opinion, and I think skinsfan69's, if you have 1st and 10 and three plays later you're punting at 4th and 4 the fact that you just gained 6 yards is kinda moot. But for GTripp, that's 6 yards that the offense has moved the ball.

I am happy that you posted this because I was about to go back and read all of that shit.