PlayoffsPlease

You can;t seem to missing the point. Allen is NOT workign with Anderson.

This must be why he is working with Jordan Palmer. Anderson was signed as a warm body to play in games if need be. Don't over think . He isn't a coach.

Why does anyone think he would be a good coach?

I believe there is no correlation between spend and what positions it is spent on, because that pales in comparison to how effectively it is spent. Kirk Cousins for 25 million is not as good as Patrick Mahomes for 3 million. The best GM is the person who gets the most production in excess of the expected production for a position. In 2019, I would expect Mahomes is that guy. I suspect Goff is right up there too. Take Khalil Mack, he is a great player at 20 million. He was an equally great player and an incredibly better value at 5 million. Coaching is also a huge component. I think Bill Belichek somehow has figured out a way to make Julian Edelman (and wes welker before him) produce at 8 to 10 million of production above cost. Some positions , QB and DE have a huge amount of production variance between best and last, so the opportunity to exceed value is greater than at center or RB, where the production values between best and worst have a narrower range. Exceeding value is the key, far more important than weather the value is exceeded on offense or on defense.

I don't think there are two many variables. Compared to other complex systems, there really are not. I think the problem is that there are multiple strategies that have equal chance for success, and I suspect coaching and adaptability to available assets is more important than having the right "philosophy" or "focus" . I The Rams and NE have nearly identical spends at every position except for QB and Defensive Line. Essentially the Rams have invested the difference in Brady and Goff in Donald. (Oline too) either you are making a lame facetious remark, or you don't get the concepts at all. In either case. ?

Fair enough. I am not clear on what the proper technical term is. But this is the total amount of cap hit for the position, regardless of who plays. For example the cap allocation to QB for the Browns is 24.2 Million.

no

Just took all the data in spotrac exactly as is. Of course their are outliers. But the truth is there are many strategies to pursue to end up between 6-10 and 10-6

The QB thing has multiple things going on. Teams like the Browns, Redskins and Vikings and 49ers have huge cap hits on QB with no production out of the spot. Other teams like the Chiefs and Rams have small cap hits and great production.

50% of this board is people arguing which cliche is correct, when pretty much none of them are.

If you don't understand the difference between correlation and causation, I have lost you already. I took each team's spotrac cap allocation by positional group for each team, and then calculated the statistical correlation between the number of wins each team had. The summary is that there is no significant correlation between wins and any position, there is no significant statistical correlation for offense or defense or special teams as a whole. I also looked at the correlation for a teams "balance factor" . Balance factor is the difference between Offensive and Defensive cap allocation. Zero would be perfect balance. There is also no significant correlation between balance and winning. Finally I looked at total cap used. There is also no significant statistical correlation between total cap used and wins. Perfect correlation would be a value of one. Perfect negative no correlation would be a value of minus 1. Zero means perfectly uncorrelated. In the context that nothing reaches the level of being significant, the position with the worst negative correlation (ie more money spent = less wins) is RB. And the position with the best correlation is linebacker. As a group defense is slightly positive, offensive slightly negative. I have not spent too much time on the details. But I think the large number of teams eating bad QB contracts is the main thing that hammers offenses. That plus Rb. Interetingly Cap allocation to the "trenches" has no correlation at all.

I am lucky to know with certainty that you are wrong on every point in this post.

Among QBs whom accounted for more than 80% of the offense of games they started in, Josh Allen was #1 in every single statistical category, running or passing. I have a theory that when he is not surrounded by the leagues worst receivers and worst running attack, he will become very successful.

Brady's cap hit this year is 22 million. Maybe below market, hardly a rookie deal.

You can't confuse Brady's 22 million 2018 (27 mm in 2019) with a Rookie contract. My implied point was that some GM and coaching staffs are superior to others, and find a way to be consistently competitive without a rookie contract QB> But I agree with your post.

I dont think Tom Brady or Drew Brees are still on a rookie contract, but I could be wrong.

I was just pointing out that your previous post suggesting people need to prove the negative is completely inane.

he is not even on the team. You also cannot prove that Pegula is not circumventing that cap.

The events Hunt was involved in were not related in anyway to his employment.

Law enforcement is probably too narrow. They handed out a punishment (which is the job of a court, not the NFL, in my opinion) . I don't care for lynch mobs either.

Pretty much the main task for GMs and Head Coaches is watching film and doing "retrospective analysis". Unless you are a time traveler, it is the only kind of analysis available. So in reality, you are saying you don't like analysis. Good organizations stay on top for a long time, because they make more correct decisions than the other teams.

I agree with the spirit of your post. What do you mean by gender equality in this context. If she hit him for example, should she be fired from her job and banned from employment elsewhere. Or do you mean if Hunt had hit a man, he should be similarly banned? Because from what I have read a lot of NFL guys hit other guys and there are no repercussions.

I am not a big fan of employers acting as law enforcement , even the NFL. These events happened outside the NFL, and to me are a matter for law enforcement to deal with as it sees fit.

I disagree about competitiveness being the main draw. First. Bills fans are as a rabid as any fan base, and we have been one of the two least competitive teams over the last 2 decades. Next, people like villains and heroes and the drama they bring. In football villains are typically greatness. Fans recall the steel curtain, or the 85 Bears or recent vintage patriots because they dominated the league. A few lucky fans consider them heroes, the rest villains. As long as teams meet the bare minimum of a "any given Sunday" chance, the required level of competitiveness has been achieved. In reality, this is an unimportant point.