Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

espn.com passing myth


KAOSkins

Recommended Posts

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2241159

Myth No. 4: A 300-yard passer usually wins (46 percent)

On the surface, this just can't be possible. Can it?

Three hundred yards is a lot of real estate in an NFL game. The numbers say that when you produce a 300-yard passer, you have a better chance of losing.

On Nov. 13, there were four 300-yard passers:

• Miami's Gus Frerotte (360 yards).

• Arizona's Kurt Warner (359)

• Oakland's Kerry Collins (310).

• St. Louis' Marc Bulger (304).

This bodes well and it makes sense. In most of the NFL passing too much is all about catching up and that is not a good thing. LaVar is going to get in Warner's head. Stats are stats but I like the ones that favor us anyway.

:2cents:

Hope I posted this correctly.

We will rock the valley of the sun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their logic is faulty on at least one "myth":

Myth No. 3: No. 1 conference seed advances to Super Bowl (50 percent)

What the writer fails to take into consideration is that the other 50% is split up among five other seeds...if it were broken down, you might find that the No. 2 seed advances 30% of the time, the No. 3 seed advances 10% of the time, and the No. 4 seed and wildcards advance 10% of the time combined. So, in comparison, the No. 1 seed advancing to the Super Bowl 50% of the time is a HUGE advantage...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Califan007 I agree with you on that one. Like I said stats are stats (and can be made to bolster any argument). I do like that fact that the cards should have to rely on their passing game, with a mediocre run game. Our dbacks are getting back to form and since the their run blocking isn't all that good we shouldn't have to overload the box. We're not giving up the big plays on the pass too much so I think we match up against the cards pretty well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stats are convenient for the mediots who want to fill airtime, but it usually doesn't take too much looking to see how misleading they can be. For instance, you see QBs who throw for big numbers, does that mean they win? A lot of the time it's because they were behind and had to throw way too much to try and catch up. The same way with RBs yardage, a team ahead in the 2nd half can just pound the ball to eat the clock, but it doesn't always say anything pertinent about the game. Time of possession means more, but before this season how often did you hear that discussed? Stats are like lumber, meaningless in themselves without some overall sense and a plan to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Califan007 I agree with you on that one. Like I said stats are stats (and can be made to bolster any argument). I do like that fact that the cards should have to rely on their passing game, with a mediocre run game. Our dbacks are getting back to form and since the their run blocking isn't all that good we shouldn't have to overload the box. We're not giving up the big plays on the pass too much so I think we match up against the cards pretty well.

I do agree with you there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stats can be used to fill airtime with useless stuff, but they can also be used to discover interesting and important trends, even to predict things.

Statistics is probably the most misunderstood, misused and misinterpreted science. Most people confuse even basic things like the difference between a correlation and a cause-effect relationship...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stats can be used to fill airtime with useless stuff, but they can also be used to discover interesting and important trends, even to predict things.

Statistics is probably the most misunderstood, misused and misinterpreted science. Most people confuse even basic things like the difference between a correlation and a cause-effect relationship...

Very Good! Think about the alternatives to stats though. Opinion, often with the misnomer "analysis", is the first one that comes to my mind. :rolleyes: If one is going to say that the mediots misuse stats, well they misuse analysis a whole lot more IMHO. At least stats have the potential to be objective (Depending on how there used).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you have to throw so much you are usually throwing to catch up. Although, I remember a cardinals game where Boomer Esiason looked Johnny Unitas! I couldn't believe that they beat us that game. He threw for like 450 yards that game. I think that Warner is going down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...