VY signs with Packers

[IsntLifeFunny]

Look at last season. Johnson was more effective for the most part with Hasselbeck at QB than Locker. Which goes against all of this because not only was Locker a bigger threat to run but he was also a bigger threat to throw the ball deeper down the field.

 

What's the real reason that Johnson had most of his best games with Hasselbeck in the lineup rather tha Locker? The interior of the OL was not hurt when Hasselbeck played.

Another logical fallacy. How about the fact that Hasslebeck could actually run an NFL offense. Jake Locker couldn't run an NFL offense last year. The line obviously plays into this, but the way you are arriving at your conclusion is illogical. You are saying "see, Locker was mobile and could throw further, so that means the stats should show CJ doing better, right? It's the line!"  Then you use your preconceived and correct, but irrelevant conclusion, to prove your off-topic point.

[OILERMAN]

08- the first 6 games of 09 was CJs highest yds per carry stretch, all with Collins

[IsntLifeFunny]

Yds per carry was higher under Collins, of course he had more yards when he got a lot more carries

Sorry the stats don't show VY opened up the running game, you glossed over 08

OK. I'm giving up reasoning with anyone about the fact that the guy was not a feature back and was unknown in the NFL in 08. I'm giving up on the fact that CJ had a better YPC as a feature back that had been game planned against with VY in the game, on more carries per game, when the offense was dedicated to him and everyone knew he was getting the ball  before Fisher made it extremely obvious that he wasn't even pretending to throw the football.

 

Not serious. As I said, it's my opinion, and the total stats and stats in context prove my point, but Oman is correct in terms of YPC (not as a featured back and not with nearly the same production but still correct).

[Pragidealist]

Right, which goes against all of the stats I just presented. Show any stats to support your argument. All of the stats show that as soon as VY was inserted in the lineup, CJ blew the fuck up and went on a record tear.

BTW, don't be indirect. If you are disputing something then don't say 'many posters'. I'm the only one making the logical argument that is backed by the stats.

Your stats are still correlations. No causation. It's that logic that leads one to conclude things like diet cokes make you obese. Because more ppl who are obese drink diet cokes than non obese.

It's faulty use of stats to make causation conclusions based only on correlations.

[OILERMAN]

Number of carries has no bearing on "opening up the running game"

[IsntLifeFunny]

Your stats are still correlations. No causation. It's that logic that leads one to conclude things like diet cokes make you obese. Because more ppl who are obese drink diet cokes than non obese.

It's faulty use of stats to make causation conclusions based only on correlations.

I never said the stats proved causation. I said they are evidence and as stats are irrefutable unto their own.

[Pragidealist]

I never said the stats proved causation. I said they are evidence and as stats are irrefutable unto their own.

Fair enough

[IsntLifeFunny]

Number of carries has no bearing on "opening up the running game"

You are smarter than this. You know that's not what I'm saying. CJ split carries his first year, wasn't a feature back, and wasn't heavily schemed against. in 09, CJ outproduced in every category over VY's first 6 games over Collin's six games. His YPC didn't drop until it was blatantly obvious that CJ was being force fed and we were out of contention...I dare anyone to challenge this statement alone.

[scine09]

It's all about the offensive line.

 

That's why when Peterson didn't play the VIkings didn't suffer much of a dropoff.

 

Give an NFL RB big holes and he will exploit them. That's why that RB is in the NFL to begin with.

[japan]

Actually if my memory is correct, VY running hurt CJ because the would load the box to stop both from running and dared him to throw.

The game was made as easy as possible for him and he still sucked

Of course. These VY nuts keep all of these myths going. Oilerman completely blew up Funny's argument.

[IsntLifeFunny]

It's all about the offensive line.

 

That's why when Peterson didn't play the VIkings didn't suffer much of a dropoff.

 

Give an NFL RB big holes and he will exploit them. That's why that RB is in the NFL to begin with.

My friend, you apparently have an excellent memory. I'll give you credit for that. However, when you enter an argument and want to entirely change the entire premise of the argument, you have to let that be known what you're doing. If you don't then you end up using logical fallacies because your argument isn't in-tune with what's actually being discussed.

[IsntLifeFunny]

Of course. These VY nuts keep all of these myths going. Oilerman completely blew up Funny's argument.

 

Either you lack reading comprehension or haven't been paying attention. The entire thread I've done nothing but show my absolute and utter contempt for VY. And BTW, you apparently can't understand stats, either. The stats absolutely support my argument from 08-10 in terms of the context of the stats and especially overall production.

 

In 08, our team wasn't centered around CJ and we won 13 games based on defense. In 09, our defense fell off, we made CJ our primary back and we went 0-6 under Collins. Insert VY, and we go 8-2 with CJ blistering the record book. To argue against this is to argue against facts. Fuck VY, he doesn't really matter in the equation except that his presence opened up different options for the run game, which was the basis of the argument.

 

How is this hard for everyone to grasp. We went 0-6 and then went 8-2 with less production from our passing game...how the hell does that happen? Well it happens when your RB goes on a tear that only Dickerson and Earl Campbell have ever accomplished. What changed? Well, we could argue the schedule (and this is the only freaking argument against mine, which at least Oman pointed out), but I don't think a simple change in schedule accounts for record breaking stats. In my opinion, the schedule helped, but the implementation of a duel threat QB to go along with our monstrous line (shout out to Scine, because he's right about the importance of the line) led to a record breaking stretch of games. I'm beating a dead horse here, but how is this so tough to understand? The stats prove that CJ had an uptick in production when VY entered the game and only fell off when CJ began getting 30 carries a game (which for a back at 195 pounds is a hell of a beating).

 

It doesn't prove causation, but the stats prove the fact that CJ's stats skyrocketed for 5 straight weeks and never really fell off until he was ran into the dirt over the last 5 weeks (still averaging over 100 yards a game).

[scine09]

My friend, you apparently have an excellent memory. I'll give you credit for that. However, when you enter an argument and want to entirely change the entire premise of the argument, you have to let that be known what you're doing. If you don't then you end up using logical fallacies because your argument isn't in-tune with what's actually being discussed.

In a post I made earlier today I referenced that there are arguments to be made on both sides. But the one constant is that when a RB has a good year generally his offense line is good.

 

I don't buy that Johnson was better than Hasselbeck because of Hasselbeck's experience. That also flies in the face of your argument about Johnson being better with Young than Collins. Do you think Young EVER knew how to run an NFL offense? I would bet Locker has a much better grasp on running an NFL offense than Young ever did. And he was certainly given a lot more responsibility last year than Young ever had. And Collins certainly knew how to run an NFL offense.

[Pragidealist]

Either you lack reading comprehension or haven't been paying attention. The entire thread I've done nothing but show my absolute and utter contempt for VY. And BTW, you apparently can't understand stats, either. The stats absolutely support my argument from 08-10 in terms of the context of the stats and especially overall production.

In 08, our team wasn't centered around CJ and we won 13 games based on defense. In 09, our defense fell off, we made CJ our primary back and we went 0-6 under Collins. Insert VY, and we go 8-2 with CJ blistering the record book. To argue against this is to argue against facts. Fuck VY, he doesn't really matter in the equation except that his presence opened up different options for the run game, which was the basis of the argument.

You're doing it again. It's not an arguement against stats. It's an argument against your conclusions.

As you've said, those stats are just evidence of support. And in my opinion - not compelling evidence because they are corelational.

[IsntLifeFunny]

You're doing it again. It's not an arguement against stats. It's an argument against your conclusions.

As you've said, those stats are just evidence of support. And in my opinion - not compelling evidence because they are corelational.

Ummm point out where anything I said was incorrect? We went 8-2 under Vince: fact. CJ went on a record tear when VY came in the game: fact. These two facts (along with everything else I've written in terms of stats) lend credence to the opinion that VY opened up different options for the run game and CJ flourished. How is that illogical or improper use of stats?