TheChosenTitan Posted October 15, 2013 Report Share Posted October 15, 2013 Who said we were better with Shitpatrick playing? No one. But we were not "pretty good" with Locker playing outside of maybe 6 quarters of football. Anyone with a basic understanding of football knows this. Only a person with an agenda regarding Locker would deny it. Yea ofcourse our offense could be better and we need to have less 3 and outs but atleast we were winning. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WG53 Posted October 15, 2013 Report Share Posted October 15, 2013 Yea ofcourse our offense could be better and we need to have less 3 and outs but atleast we were winning. This has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragidealist Posted October 15, 2013 Report Share Posted October 15, 2013 Passer rating says nothing about blocking or the running game despite what you say. It is a stat used to judge a qb's play based on yards, tds, ints, and comp. %. Fumbles, rushing yards, and sacks have no bearing in the equation so saying it is indicative of rb and ol play or the offense as a whole is bullshit. It is solely an evaluation of the passer not the offense. The play of the passer is dependent on all of those issues. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragidealist Posted October 15, 2013 Report Share Posted October 15, 2013 Who said we were better with Shitpatrick playing? No one. But we were not "pretty good" with Locker playing outside of maybe 6 quarters of football. Anyone with a basic understanding of football knows this. Only a person with an agenda regarding Locker would deny it. You keep using those words. I dont think they mean what you think they mean. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragidealist Posted October 15, 2013 Report Share Posted October 15, 2013 Who said we were better with Shitpatrick playing? No one. But we were not "pretty good" with Locker playing outside of maybe 6 quarters of football. Anyone with a basic understanding of football knows this. Only a person with an agenda regarding Locker would deny it. And to be honest of any of my biases were affrcting this judgement its more likely my Titans optimism and "homerism" than my Locker bias. Locker bias would be less likely to focus on team success and more likely to focus on comparisonns with favorablr Qb performances. This is much morr aligned with my obsession with offensivd efficiency across multiple sports and my optimostic perspective regarding the Titans. Just my opinion Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WG53 Posted October 16, 2013 Report Share Posted October 16, 2013 You keep using those words. I dont think they mean what you think they mean. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WG53 Posted October 16, 2013 Report Share Posted October 16, 2013 The play of the passer is dependent on all of those issues. Try harder. This is just not accurate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragidealist Posted October 16, 2013 Report Share Posted October 16, 2013 Try harder. This is just not accurate. Of course its accurate. Is big ben a worse qb now than his SB year? Or just his surrounding cast? The passer rating picks that up, not his individual play or ability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WG53 Posted October 16, 2013 Report Share Posted October 16, 2013 Of course its accurate. Is big ben a worse qb now than his SB year? Or just his surrounding cast? The passer rating picks that up, not his individual play or ability. Jfc this is stupid. The problem with Roethlisberger is his playing style and the offense his OC want to run do not match up well. He is not a quick 3 step and pass kind of guy. He is better on deep drops, roll outs, and improvising. This is a square peg into round hole issue. Of course you don't know this and think it fits your idea of passer rating being more than what it is, an individual stat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragidealist Posted October 16, 2013 Report Share Posted October 16, 2013 Jfc this is stupid. The problem with Roethlisberger is his playing style and the offense his OC want to run do not match up well. He is not a quick 3 step and pass kind of guy. He is better on deep drops, roll outs, and improvising. This is a square peg into round hole issue. Of course you don't know this and think it fits your idea of passer rating being more than what it is, an individual stat. Yeah. Im about ready to agree to disagree. We have seen fisher hide younf behind a good running game. We have seen qbs look poor or great based on the health of their surrounding cast. If we cant even agree that a qbs abilitu depends on the online giving him time and the wr being able to catch the ball- then we arent going to come close to agreeing about the passee rating. In my view a qb can make the perfect read and make the perfect pass but the offense gets nothing if the wr drops the ball. Some qbs have it easier than others because the running game created an effective play action game. The passer rating gets none of that. It just gets the general success of the play. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
titanruss Posted October 16, 2013 Report Share Posted October 16, 2013 Who said we were better with Shitpatrick playing? No one. But we were not "pretty good" with Locker playing outside of maybe 6 quarters of football. Anyone with a basic understanding of football knows this. Only a person with an agenda regarding Locker would deny it.  The point that I think they are trying to make but can't get across, WG... is that the offense was improving. It was getting better every week to the point it looked elite verses the jets. To say the offense wasn't great was true for a game and 3/4s... but it was also very very good for the other game and 3/4s. That this improvement was occurring early in the season with Britt, the running game, and the oline still not playing to probably even half potential leads one to believe it would get even better as the team gelled and the season progressed.  Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WG53 Posted October 16, 2013 Report Share Posted October 16, 2013 The point that I think they are trying to make but can't get across, WG... is that the offense was improving. It was getting better every week to the point it looked elite verses the jets. To say the offense wasn't great was true for a game and 3/4s... but it was also very very good for the other game and 3/4s. That this improvement was occurring early in the season with Britt, the running game, and the oline still not playing to probably even half potential leads one to believe it would get even better as the team gelled and the season progressed. They sucked against Pittsburg, Houston, and most of the Chargers game. They did very well in a half against the Jets. The last two weeks have been.more of the same except for the occassional td drive that Locker would lead. When you are terrible and going three and out or stalling after one first down you are not doing "pretty good" period. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WG53 Posted October 16, 2013 Report Share Posted October 16, 2013 Yeah. Im about ready to agree to disagree. We have seen fisher hide younf behind a good running game. We have seen qbs look poor or great based on the health of their surrounding cast. If we cant even agree that a qbs abilitu depends on the online giving him time and the wr being able to catch the ball- then we arent going to come close to agreeing about the passee rating. In my view a qb can make the perfect read and make the perfect pass but the offense gets nothing if the wr drops the ball. Some qbs have it easier than others because the running game created an effective play action game. The passer rating gets none of that. It just gets the general success of the play. Line play is not part of passer rating. Period. It is a collection of passing stats to judge the play of a passer. Not the entire offense. Look at Rivers last night. He had like a 99 passer rating. His OL was mostly a nonfactor because he got the ball out in 2 seconds or less very often. Aaron Rodgers has been sacked 216 times since becoming a starter and his lowest rating was 93.8, his first year and only year below 100. OL play is not a factor in passer rating. Can they have an effect sure. But it is not very much. A good qb will make plays despite a poor OL. It is not a measurement of the entire offense and its efficiency. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragidealist Posted October 16, 2013 Report Share Posted October 16, 2013 Line play is not part of passer rating. Period. It is a collection of passing stats to judge the play of a passer. Not the entire offense. Look at Rivers last night. He had like a 99 passer rating. His OL was mostly a nonfactor because he got the ball out in 2 seconds or less very often. Aaron Rodgers has been sacked 216 times since becoming a starter and his lowest rating was 93.8, his first year and only year below 100. OL play is not a factor in passer rating. Can they have an effect sure. But it is not very much. A good qb will make plays despite a poor OL. It is not a measurement of the entire offense and its efficiency. Yes good qbs can make up for bad olines. And good olines can make qbs look better. Same for the run game. Same for wrs. You re looking at elitr qbs and using them as examples. There are very few qbs that are so good to overcome bad oline, bad to average wr, no running game, and bad coaching scheme. That is why they are elite. Yet every week qbs put up passer ratings as good as rivers. Is Wilson as good as Rivers in his third year? Is Flaco all of a sudden so terrible? Is manning? Is Kaep an elite passer already? His passer rating from last year would have you believe so but now sucks because it sucks? No. They are just thr center piece in thr cog. They are not elite like brady, manning, and Brees. The passing game is made up of many fluid factor and the one with the most potential impact is qb, but hes not the only one. The run game in todays nfl is just a mechanism to maximize the passing game. Without an efficient passing game- teams do not win. The best metric to judge the efficiency of the passing and therefore the offense is the passer rating because it is an algorithym of all the important passing stats. In all sports the most efficient offense wins more games and more playoff games. 99 passer rating was ranked 7th in the nfl after four games. The titans may not be a pretty good offense but through four games they played like it by ranking 7th at the most important offensive metric in the game. Producing efficiently has been shown in every sport to be more important than producimg volume. For four games the stats belied live impressions of micro failure and demonstrated a hidden success that was a key factor in the team being 3 and 1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WG53 Posted October 16, 2013 Report Share Posted October 16, 2013 Yeah keep believing that false bullshit. It is a metric used to judge a passer. In no way is it a tool for measuring offensive efficiency as you repeatedly claim. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.