How Will Campbell Be Handled?

TAFKAS


You didn't start the "Brunell vs. Bledsoe" thread but you can't deny you had an instrumental role in its demise.

No denial; but to be candid, the emotional reaction I got surprised me when I simply remarked that IMO conventional football stats are almost useless. I was made to feel like I'd just informed a kindergarten class that there was no Santa.

Again, I was just messing with you. But I can't be the only one who sees that threads you're involved in tend to take odd turns.

Sure that's fine. I love controversy, but these debates would be a whole lot more fun if we just aggravated each other without making it personal.

Jibes at your opponent is good sport if it can be done within the context of the argument and not made as ridicule.

Most NFL coaches draft a rookie QB and start him without adequate preparation and throw him to the wolves. The list of examples is endless. Are you sure you want to use NFL coaches, taken as a whole, as support for your point?

Um yes, I do. Because they know a lot more about football than I do.

Or, as you seem to be insinuating, do you think you know more than they do?

Yo, Matty

Here's a stat for you.

From Game One through SF, we averaged 267.5 yards per game. After SF, through the Tampa Bay playoff game, we averaged 143.5 yards per game. That's a 46% drop-off.

The Seattle number wasn't in the NFL.com data base for some reason.

Since Brunell went out early in the SF game and against the Giants for two or three quarters (combined games), I made no adjustment.

I didn't include the first game in Tampa Bay (226 yeards) because I excluded that game when I levelled my change against the passing game.

I make 45% a tank job, so I got in under the wire. [enter smilie face]
If you add in the Seattle game, the number drops to 38%. So you don't have to worry about a tank job anymore.

Also, if you drop Brunell's best and worst outings (both wins, btw), the number drops to 33%.

Um yes, I do. Because they know a lot more about football than I do.

Or, as you seem to be insinuating, do you think you know more than they do?

About football in general, no. But, on this point specifically, yes.

Repeating the same mistake over and over is not a sign of intelligence.

Spurrier tossed Ramsey into the arena unprepared. Gibbs is taking a more cautious route with Campbell.

I don't know as much football as Spurrier, but I'm not shy in condemning his approach with Ramsey as dumb.

About football in general, no. But, on this point specifically, yes.

Repeating the same mistake over and over is not a sign of intelligence.

Spurrier tossed Ramsey into the arena unprepared. Gibbs is taking a more cautious route with Campbell.

I don't know as much football as Spurrier, but I'm not shy in condemning his approach with Ramsey as dumb.

talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/4145/pwned9pr.jpg

If you add in the Seattle game, the number drops to 38%. So you don't have to worry about a tank job anymore.

Also, if you drop Brunell's best and worst outings (both wins, btw), the number drops to 25%.

What is the Seattle passing yardage stat?

Which high and low games do you want to throw out and what are the numbers?

Oh, and by the way...why would you throw out the high and low numbers unelss you intentionally wanted the result it gave?

I don't know as much football as Spurrier, but I'm not shy in condemning his approach with Ramsey as dumb.

Holy Crap! :eek: ......actually something we agree on. I didn't think it was possible.

Boy you're on a roll now PWNED...

I love seeing someone pwn themself

talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/4145/pwned9pr.jpg

As long as we're taking cheap shots, rumor has it that you've lied about your age in this forum.

Is it true you're really ten?