So stats don't prove a point, but points can be proven very well by the personal perceptions of an anonymous person who calls himself "Smith21" on a message board. :unsure:
Tannehill on a shorter leash for 2014
- Thread starter Miami 13
- Start date
hoops
Tua time!
numbers in a vacuum...ammo for the lacking football common sense crowd
I suppose the "football common sense crowd" is the one that thought Chad Henne was a franchise QB, yourself included.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2004
- Messages
- 5,933
- Reaction score
- 11,060
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2007
- Messages
- 10,415
- Reaction score
- 13,335
No worse than thinking this historically bad O-line was "good enough"I suppose the "football common sense crowd" is the one that thought Chad Henne was a franchise QB, yourself included.
hoops
Tua time!
I suppose the "football common sense crowd" is the one that thought Chad Henne was a franchise QB, yourself included.
and i never said that...so don't keep up with it...you would think at some point you'd get tired of being owned on here...it's obvious what you are here to do...i hope you get the same treatment you got at thephins...you sure deserve it
Why, after months or years, does it seem to fall of deaf ear that football is a product of 11 players on the field, that in order to account for the action of one you most understand what the other 10 are doing. You can show stats, some that may even be "trends", but it doesn't tell a complete story and is a poor way to evaluate an individuals play. If you like stats, there is a sport call baseball that is heavily stat depended that you could follow and actually make headway with proving something one way or the other, but in football it will fall short.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2007
- Messages
- 10,415
- Reaction score
- 13,335
its a common mistake, the QB touches the ball on every play so the entire offense is dumped on their shoulders. They get too much credit for the good and too much blame for the bad.
You should try using your eyes not some meaningly usless stats
I used my eyes, your OL was not bad. They were mediocre, I saw way too many times where the QB was the cause of the sack. Just reinforcing my opinion w/ these #s.
what made this OL "historically bad"?
was it good? of course not but it wasn't bad and certainly not historically bad.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2007
- Messages
- 10,415
- Reaction score
- 13,335
Franchise record in sacks allowed
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2008
- Messages
- 59,363
- Reaction score
- 155,453
i usually don't quote stats but 27th in run blocking and 30th in pass protection with a record 58 sacks (some on the qb granted) is pretty frickin bad if you ask me. .
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol
so what? if Seattle attempted the same # of passes they were on pace to allow more sacks. Your Ol was certainly not a strength but blaming them for everything is just an excuse especially since thye played well for the most part the second half of the season including against our excellent DL. You lost week 17 and missed the playoffs b/c of the QB not the OL.
And....
I decided to take the two sources (PFF and Football Outsiders) and see if they are at all consistent with each other. The football outsiders list was not for the complete season and they used different grouping criteria (PFF was blocking or QB, FO was blown block, confusion, or coverage). Clearly the confusion sacks could be on the QB or on the OL. I decided to just sort the FO list by blown blocks and the PFF list by blocking sacks (both highest to lowest) to see how similar the lists were. I split the 32 teams into 3 groups (11 in the top, 10 in the middle, and 11 in the bottom).
For the top 11 list (presumably the worst OLs for pass blocking), 8 out of the 11 were common to both lists. For the bottom 11 list (better OL), 7 out of the 11 were on both lists. Both lists had Miami as the worst and in both cases by a wide margin. For example, on the FO list, Miami's OL was credited with 35 blown blocks with the next four worst at 25, 22, 22, 22. PPF credits Miami's OL with 41 blocking sacks with the next 4 worst at 33, 32, 32, 31.
The two INDEPENDENT lists are very similar to one another and both show that Miami's OL was largely to blame and worse than the rest of the league by a wide margin.
Why are people so dense on this topic. These are not my evaluations.
this site says they were 19th: https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/01/13/2013-offensive-line-rankings/2/
---------- Post added at 01:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:56 PM ----------
PFF said this:
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/01/13/2013-offensive-line-rankings/2/