Crazy Josh Allen stat ahead of his 7th season

[Alphadawg7]

Josh is entering his 7th season, so he has not even played a game yet in his 7th season…

 

Yet, he already ranks 4th all time in TDs through 7 seasons and only needs 11 TDs this season to break the record of most TDs all time in their first 7 seasons.  
 

LFG!  GoBills!

 

 

 

[mannc]

1 minute ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Josh is entering his 7th season, so he has not even played a game yet in his 7th season…

 

Yet, he already ranks 4th all time in TDs through 7 seasons and only needs 11 TDs this season to break the record of most TDs all time in their first 7 seasons.  
 

LFG!  GoBills!

 

 

 

Mahomes has also played only six seasons, practically speaking

[julian]

9 minutes ago, mannc said:

Mahomes has also played only six seasons, practically speaking

Allen also never had Andy Reid drawing up plays and was throwing to fat Benjamin.

 

Cant we just have this stat without shouting out Mahomes lol.

 

Im just venting in general terms, not at you lol.

Edited September 8 by julian

[Dr.Sack]

Dude is a freak

[Buffalo716]

Josh is a once in a generation type player

[Ethan in Cleveland]

8 hours ago, mannc said:

Mahomes has also played only six seasons, practically speaking

Allen only played 12 games and started 11 his rookie year. He only had 10 TD. So if he gets 21 TD this year then he beats Mahommes even if you remove his rookie year numbers.

[rusty shackleford]

51 minutes ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

Allen only played 12 games and started 11 his rookie year. He only had 10 TD. So if he gets 21 TD this year then he beats Mahommes even if you remove his rookie year numbers.

Not that it makes much of a difference but to close the rookie year gap just slightly, Mahomes did start one game his first year, so not like he didn’t see the field at all. No touchdowns and one interception.

[RoscoeParrish]

56 minutes ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

Allen only played 12 games and started 11 his rookie year. He only had 10 TD. So if he gets 21 TD this year then he beats Mahommes even if you remove his rookie year numbers.

He had 18 TD’s as a rookie. This stat is for sure counting rushing TD’s.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

2 minutes ago, RoscoeParrish said:

He had 18 TD’s as a rookie. This stat is for sure counting rushing TD’s.

Oh I didn't see that. Dam. Then just put an asterisk there and marvel at what Marino was able to do in his era. 

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

Oh I didn't see that. Dam. Then just put an asterisk there and marvel at what Marino was able to do in his era. 

 

Josh still only needs 29 this year to pass Mahomes even if you take out the rookie years. He had 29 passing TDs alone last year - his lowest since breaking out - but had 15 rushing TDs. His total TDs since his breakout 3rd season are: 45, 42, 42, 44. 

 

If Allen stays healthy 29 is a walk in the park.

[RobbRiddick]

I've said this before but the fact that Dan Marino is still on this list despite playing in an era when QBs could get beaten up and WRs could get mugged without flags constantly coming out is a testament to how unreal the guy was

[kitchen sink]

I work in analytics and will tell you that the NFL is all small sample size data. 

 

As such, it is quite easy to identify examples like this, but they are not really very valuable. 

 

The question I have for the folks that want to change head coaches is what evidence do you have that you can get a better head coach?

 

Unfortunately for the last 25 plus years we have had to compete against possibly the two best coach and QB parings in the history of the NFL, at a time when the QB position has been growing in importance (think about all the rule changes to protect players at the position in that time). 

 

Those pairings being Brady/Belichick and Mahomes/Reid. 

 

I understand the argument that Josh Allen is just as good as Mahomes and the issue is the head coach, but you are not going to get Andy Reid to come here and I have seen no evidence that there is another alternative that would be a better option than letting McDermott figure out the last few things needed to bring a super bowl trophy to Buffalo.  

 

There is a tremendous opportunity cost in changing head coaches, especially when the years you are potentially wasting are with a talent like Josh Allen. 

 

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

The other Josh Allen stat I love is the consecutive seasons with 40+ TD's. Only two players in NFL history have had two such consecutive seasons, Breed and Allen. Only Allen has done it for 4 consecutive seasons. In all four of those seasons he has hit 40+ TD's in 16 games or less. He's never needed the 17th game to reach the mark. 

11 hours ago, mannc said:

Mahomes has also played only six seasons, practically speaking

 

Practically speaking, Josh is on pace to be the all-time TD leader. Mahomes is not. 

[Mr. WEO]

27 minutes ago, kitchen sink said:

I work in analytics and will tell you that the NFL is all small sample size data. 

 

As such, it is quite easy to identify examples like this, but they are not really very valuable. 

 

The question I have for the folks that want to change head coaches is what evidence do you have that you can get a better head coach?

 

Unfortunately for the last 25 plus years we have had to compete against possibly the two best coach and QB parings in the history of the NFL, at a time when the QB position has been growing in importance (think about all the rule changes to protect players at the position in that time). 

 

Those pairings being Brady/Belichick and Mahomes/Reid. 

 

I understand the argument that Josh Allen is just as good as Mahomes and the issue is the head coach, but you are not going to get Andy Reid to come here and I have seen no evidence that there is another alternative that would be a better option than letting McDermott figure out the last few things needed to bring a super bowl trophy to Buffalo.  

 

There is a tremendous opportunity cost in changing head coaches, especially when the years you are potentially wasting are with a talent like Josh Allen. 

 

 

"opportunity costs" would incur when you do NOT change head coaches and keep the same guy with the same results every year.  Also, you are assuming that it is  impossible that there is a better alternative HC.  Haven't 6 seasons of a talent like Josh Allen already been wasted?

 

someone "in analytics" would understand this.  

[Doc]

2 hours ago, RoscoeParrish said:

He had 18 TD’s as a rookie. This stat is for sure counting rushing TD’s.

 

Yup.  As they should be.

 

1 hour ago, RobbRiddick said:

I've said this before but the fact that Dan Marino is still on this list despite playing in an era when QBs could get beaten up and WRs could get mugged without flags constantly coming out is a testament to how unreal the guy was

 

Yeah, throwing for 5,000+ and 4,700+ yards and 48 and 44 TDs back then was amazing.  But those were major outliers for him as he averaged about 23 TDs a season (games started, removing final season) around those 2 years. 

 

27 minutes ago, kitchen sink said:

I work in analytics and will tell you that the NFL is all small sample size data. 

 

As such, it is quite easy to identify examples like this, but they are not really very valuable. 

 

The question I have for the folks that want to change head coaches is what evidence do you have that you can get a better head coach?

 

Unfortunately for the last 25 plus years we have had to compete against possibly the two best coach and QB parings in the history of the NFL, at a time when the QB position has been growing in importance (think about all the rule changes to protect players at the position in that time). 

 

Those pairings being Brady/Belichick and Mahomes/Reid. 

 

I understand the argument that Josh Allen is just as good as Mahomes and the issue is the head coach, but you are not going to get Andy Reid to come here and I have seen no evidence that there is another alternative that would be a better option than letting McDermott figure out the last few things needed to bring a super bowl trophy to Buffalo.  

 

There is a tremendous opportunity cost in changing head coaches, especially when the years you are potentially wasting are with a talent like Josh Allen.

 

That's what I've been saying.  Anyone who says "McD needs to be fired" never has an answer for "who will replace him?"  I'm not even sure who among the active HCs (as you said, Reid isn't leaving KC/coming here) I'd take.  McVay?  Taylor?

 

And it's amazing Josh is annually on this list given his first 2 seasons, where he was unpolished as a passer and had poor offenses around him.  And barring injury, he should remain the QB with the most TDs in X seasons for the rest of his career.

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

20 minutes ago, Doc said:

That's what I've been saying.  Anyone who says "McD needs to be fired" never has an answer for "who will replace him?"  I'm not even sure who among the active HCs (as you said, Reid isn't leaving KC/coming here) I'd take.  McVay?  Taylor?

 

 

Only thing that comes to mind for me is hiring Spags as HC just so KC doesn't have him anymore. Addition by subtraction from our arch rival. 

[Boatdrinks]

12 hours ago, mannc said:

Mahomes has also played only six seasons, practically speaking

So what? Wouldn’t change his spot on the list. The point of this thread isn’t Pat Mahomes. 

[kitchen sink]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

"opportunity costs" would incur when you do NOT change head coaches and keep the same guy with the same results every year.  Also, you are assuming that it is  impossible that there is a better alternative HC.  Haven't 6 seasons of a talent like Josh Allen already been wasted?

 

someone "in analytics" would understand this.  

I think you need to see my reference to "opportunity cost" in the context of the full reply.  That context being there is no better option based on evidence, just taking a chance on someone else.  As such, you are wasting on opportunity to see if a coach generally regarded as one of the ten best in the NFL can figure out the last few items needed to win it all. 

 

It would be interesting to see how many coaches have even had a chance at a super bowl with the same team after their first seven years, as I would expect the turnover to limit that number.

[Mr. WEO]

4 minutes ago, kitchen sink said:

I think you need to see my reference to "opportunity cost" in the context of the full reply.  That context being there is no better option based on evidence, just taking a chance on someone else.  As such, you are wasting on opportunity to see if a coach generally regarded as one of the ten best in the NFL can figure out the last few items needed to win it all. 

 

It would be interesting to see how many coaches have even had a chance at a super bowl with the same team after their first seven years, as I would expect the turnover to limit that number.

 

 

standing pat and not making change is the definition of opportunity cost.  

 

Also, you cannot say "there is no better option" when none are tried.  you assume all other choices are simply worse, "based on evidence" which you do not provide.  Instead, you are comparing all others to a guy you are hoping will "figure out" things in his 8th year with this team. 

 

 

[Saxum]

3 hours ago, RobbRiddick said:

I've said this before but the fact that Dan Marino is still on this list despite playing in an era when QBs could get beaten up and WRs could get mugged without flags constantly coming out is a testament to how unreal the guy was

 

Marino is on list because he was terrible at fakes and RBs got demolished so he had to throw.

Every time Marino would do a fake the bar would yell "Fake!" before he even went to hand off.

 

The good news is he gets a free supply of Relaxium for his troubles.

He got his start during year when he was on IR being on golf course and doing commercials.