A new Burgundy Army Article: Learning from Mistakes; Ed. 1

Well done, G. The best yet. :biggthump

As a fan, I usually don't pay attention to what money the players get. It wouldn't bother me if the backup punt returner was the highest paid player, and the star QB was the lowest -- as long as they perform. However, I understand that money is an issue, and you can get into trouble if you don't account for it. I guess it's because I just don't understand all the financial stuff.

I hear what your saying but stats dont always tell the whole story. The thing about saunders offence is that if your moving the ball down the field and having a lot of production then all of our weapons will be getting the ball more. I see under production of the new acquistions as more of a result of inability to move the ball limiting to the total number of plays. Great article and great analysis but stats never tell the whole story.

good analysis. I always thought signing both guys was extravagent & not a good use of cap $ down the road. Plus I'm not convinced that either guy gets open enough to command the qb's attention. When Moss was out it seemed the guy to step up most was Thrash, other than Cooley. I think Thrash is as good a #2 possession reciever as either ARE or Loyd, he just lacks the speed.

In sumation:

Cost vs. benefit

or


Investment vs. reward.

At any rate, the results have been underwhelming, and quite predictable. Statistically speaking, of course.


Great job!

First of all, great article Gtripp. Well put together and researched. I guess where I disagree with you is where you assert that our offense was succesful last year based on it's number 11 ranking. Your analysis assumes that this is sufficient production. I disagree. You always try to get better. The fact that you can identify the majority of our passes going to two players indicates the degree to which our offense was flawed and one-dimensional last year. I don't think that is something you strive to repeat. Moreover, what that ranking doesn't indicate is the degree to which our offense was woefully inconsistent last year, save for a 4-5 game stretch at the end of the season. We would follow up 52 points in SF with 0 in NY. 35 againts TB with I think 13 against the Raiders.

The problem is not that we tinkered with the system by adding new players. In my opinion the problem is that we overhauled our entire offensive philosophy, moving it away from the strengths of the team (one may disagree, but here is not the place to debate that). In fact, our offensive production this year has been similar to last year's, at least based on statistics. It's the defense that has held us back.

great article, trip, the classic case of where marginal costs exceed marginal benefits

the only thing you can really address here to criticize is that the offense in its enitrety is not a constant, meaning the 2nd receiver will not get the same % of balls every year, and that each position can be looked at individually. an improvement in #2 may create more space for #1 etc. etc. altogether though, i think its pretty clear that with an offense that was able to be #11 last year, adding expensive WRs that didn't get the ball that much in that pretty efficient system is a dumb move.