There is a falsehood running rampant on this board

[Lori]

I wasn't really sure what your interpretation was, seemed more in favor of the Fitz Followers to me and I didn't have any problem with how Simon derived at his conclusions.

 

Just pointing out your way of comparison was different then Simons and his way of comparison was more accurate in my opinion that's all, didn't mean to drag you into a drawn out explanation, my bad.

If you think his way of comparison is more accurate, using whatever the guy writing the PBP deems to be "deep" as opposed to the actual yardage, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Guest dog14787]

What are you saying, Trent... you take what the defense gives you?

 

While I agree, your gameplan should change week to week to take advantage of the defense you're facing; that doesn't mean you allow the defense to dictate what you do. Do that and you lose. Yes, sometimes a defense may be shifting coverage to your best WR, but that doesn't mean you don't try to get him involved in the offense. You have to dictate to them, not the other way around.

 

On your second point, it's difficult to average out the plays over a longer time frame considering that Fitzy has only started one game and played roughly half of another.

 

 

 

Yup, I agree, and that's the problem with comparison like this, you don't have enough accurate data to prove anything really.

[murra]

If you think his way of comparison is more accurate, using whatever the guy writing the PBP deems to be "deep" as opposed to the actual yardage, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

But in reality, you're both inaccurate. Clearly judging a sport that plays only 16 games, each play holds significance, but it's difficult to overlook that the relatively small sample size we have with each will allow us to skew the stats whichever way we desire.

[Guest dog14787]

If you think his way of comparison is more accurate, using whatever the guy writing the PBP deems to be "deep" as opposed to the actual yardage, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

 

Using just two games for comparison is what I was opposed to, nothing to do with yardage, so I suppose you could say we disagree, but aren't in agreement with what we are disagreeing about, if that makes any sense.( which I sometimes don't as you already well know)

[Lori]

But in reality, you're both inaccurate. Clearly judging a sport that plays only 16 games, each play holds significance, but it's difficult to overlook that the relatively small sample size we have with each will allow us to skew the stats whichever way we desire.

I'd argue that one can begin to see some trends after eight quarters with Fitzpatrick, but I'll allow that there's room for discussion on that.

 

Here's one utterly inescapable trend which Mr. Fitzpatrick needs to change, though, and soon: 44.7%. This isn't the Kemp-era AFL, when a QB could get away with completing fewer than half his passes.

[The Big Cat]

I'd argue that one can begin to see some trends after eight quarters with Fitzpatrick, but I'll allow that there's room for discussion on that.

 

Here's one utterly inescapable trend which Mr. Fitzpatrick needs to change, though, and soon: 44.7%. This isn't the Kemp-era AFL, when a QB could get away with completing fewer than half his passes.

 

Yes.

 

Coming home. Two full weeks now with the starters, offensive line with yet another week's experience, certainly a weaker secondary than he saw against New York, and most important:

 

An acknowledgment now from opposing DC's that Evans is still a deep threat. Lest we forget Lee's 170 yd 2 td quarter last time we faced Houston, and lest we forget Terrel Owens is opposite of him, still.

 

The fact that Trent didn't throw a pass longer than 20 yards against New England is astonishing. ASTONISHING. When a quarterback demonstrates a complete unwillingness to challenge past 20 yards downfield (and don't anyone start with "play calling," that's simply impossible), the offense is entirely painted into a corner.

 

Looking at the god awful stat (and that was only game 1) it's no wonder our running attack slowed considerably once this Trend continued.

 

So, believe it or not, since us lowly TSWers have noticed this statistical trend, you better believe DC's have too. Hopefully this will give us a cushion for our running backs and hopefully Fitz continues to put the heat on defenses, forcing them to respect the deep stuff.

 

However, Lori, the conditions mentioned in italics are all that give me optimism that his actual passing improves.

[ChasBB]

It is not enough to look at total "deep balls" per game. You'd have to look at what percentage of pass attempts were deep balls, how many running plays were there, etc. Just pulling out a single statistic like that is more anecdotal evidence and not really a valid comparison in-and-of-itself. Also, two games by Fitz is not enough to make it statistically valid. So many other things to consider -- weather for instance. Also, how many times was a ball thrown to a COVERED receiver with the bet being your guy is going to come down with it and how many times was ball thrown to only a wide open receiver? It'd be impossible to really break it all down -- at least not w/o a LOT of effort.

 

Here's the stat I like -- Fitz 2-0

[Dan]

It is not enough to look at total "deep balls" per game. You'd have to look at what percentage of pass attempts were deep balls, how many running plays were there, etc. Just pulling out a single statistic like that is more anecdotal evidence and not really a valid comparison in-and-of-itself. Also, two games by Fitz is not enough to make it statistically valid. So many other things to consider -- weather for instance. Also, how many times was a ball thrown to a COVERED receiver with the bet being your guy is going to come down with it and how many times was ball thrown to only a wide open receiver? It'd be impossible to really break it all down -- at least not w/o a LOT of effort.

 

Here's the stat I like -- Fitz 2-0

Breaking down QB play is really hard in the NFL.

[Alphadawg7]

I'd argue that one can begin to see some trends after eight quarters with Fitzpatrick, but I'll allow that there's room for discussion on that.

 

Here's one utterly inescapable trend which Mr. Fitzpatrick needs to change, though, and soon: 44.7%. This isn't the Kemp-era AFL, when a QB could get away with completing fewer than half his passes.

 

He has had some drops, but even if they dont drop them he is still in the 50's in terms of completion percentage. So, yeah, he definitely needs to work on that. Seems for every great ball he throws he throws one or two head scratchers that arent even close. Luckily some of those great throws were to Evans who capitalized.

[spartacus]

In my opinion, and this is just opinion as I have no stats to back it up, teams have been increasingly playing up to stop the run and short passing game each week. Because, with each week it has become more apparent that we were not looking down field to Lee or TO.

 

Initially, teams were concerned about Evans or TO beating them deep; however, by week 3 it was apparent they didn't need to. So you're seeing more teams cheat their safeties up. As a result, the run game and short passing game have become largely ineffective and our offense has looked abyssmal.

 

Until we have a QB demonstrate that he will routinely and effectively throw 15+ yards downfield, I suspect we'll continue to see limited production from the RBs.

 

it's not cheating the safeties up that was the problem with Edwards at QB.

 

Teams left the safeties to cover the WRs deep since there was little risk of being beat, or of the ball even thrown. They then brought the CBs and /or LBs to choke off the flats and short zones so Trent had no where to go with his checkdowns.

 

even better for the defense, they were also able to choke off the run game by concentrating their defenders within 3 yards of the line of scrimmage.