Jump to content

Notable Stats


HTTRDynasty

Recommended Posts

Not a stat, but apparently Mike Singletary vetoed an Alex Smith for Big Ben trade 

Quote

Then, 49ers owner John York, CEO Jed York, director of player personnel Trent Baalke and other executives called Singletary to a meeting. They had a trade in place with the Steelers for Ben Roethlisberger, who had recently been accused of sexual assault. Singletary vetoed the deal.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Forge said:

Not a stat, but apparently Mike Singletary vetoed an Alex Smith for Big Ben trade 

 

If this is true that is pretty wild.  I mean this was after his SB wins right?  I get why Singletary vetoed it considering the sexual assault case but it would be awesome to see this scenario actually play out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From an article from Colts.com by JJ Stankewitz some notable stats about Darius Leonard


https://www.colts.com/news/darius-leonard-2022-pro-bowl-linebacker-forced-fumble-punch

 

  • Leonard had eight forced fumbles, four interceptions and three fumble recoveries along with 122 tackles, four pass break-ups and three tackles for a loss in 2021. Those eight forced fumbles led the NFL.
  • Leonard became the first player in NFL history to force at least eight fumbles and intercept at least four passes in a single season.
  • Leonard is the only player in NFL history with 10 or more interceptions (he has 11), 15 or more sacks (he has 15) and 15 or more forced fumbles (he has 17) in the first five years of a career. Leonard just wrapped up his fourth season in the NFL.
  • Leonard will enter Year 5 with the Colts tied with Robert Mathis for eighth on the team's all-time tackle leaderboard with 538.

And some Colt’s fans are calling for the Colts to trade Leonard and/or Nelson to try to get Aaron Rodgers or Russell Wilson. Why would either QB want to come to Indy without Nelson there? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/25/2022 at 5:57 PM, SkippyX said:

A Dak fan is fine with hollow stats and 1 playoff win in 6 years.

They just have no idea how this keeps happening.

  • That O-line always falls apart outside the NFC East!!!!
  • Drops!!!

 

A Cowboys fan should not be.

Ive just ran across these post. Lets be open for a hot minute. You are over 40, maybe over 50. I can tell based on your posting habits; the need to try and be right, the need to stick to what you were taught, the inability to adapt to new information. Its all very baby-boomerish. 

And this isnt your fault, hell, religion has been propagated exclusively by "my mommy told me so" - - so it makes sense that some father/father figure told you when you were 8 that the running back and/or running game decides who wins. Then it was propelled by the announcers echoing that comment time and time again.

 

 

The run game doesnt matter. As soon as you accept that, the better you will be off. There are dozens of articles from multiple sites and many studies that all prove this to be true. 

Edited by Matts4313
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, iknowcool said:

How literal should one be reading this?

By the definition of literal. The run game is simply a way to make sure your QB is able to be better than the other QB. If you have a QB that isnt overly capable, running the ball is a way that you limit his opportunities to mess up - ie Jimmy G. If your QB is capable, then the run game is a tool for 3rd and short + time wasting once youve won... IE Manning, Brady, Mahomes, Brees, etc.

 

 

This is not to say that situationally running backs and the run game as a whole arent important. They are. But as a whole it doesnt really matter if its King Henry or some scrub, you will win and lose games based on how well you throw the ball and stop the other QB. 

 

QBs that have 200 yards, 1 TD and no turnovers win 95% of their games (the last time I looked it up, it was 98%, so I am guesstimating its still over 95%). RBs who rush for over 100 yards are almost 50/50 depending your time frame. Its not rocket science. Their are literally studies that show the run game in the first 50 minutes have between 0  and negative affect on you winning the game. @SkippyX's 120 yards doesnt count for the fact that teams run non stop once they are 10 points up.

Edited by Matts4313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

By the definition of literal. The run game is simply a way to make sure your QB is able to be better than the other QB. If you have a QB that isnt overly capable, running the ball is a way that you limit his opportunities to mess up - ie Jimmy G. If your QB is capable, then the run game is a tool for 3rd and short + time wasting once youve won... IE Manning, Brady, Mahomes, Brees, etc.

This is not to say that situationally running backs and the run game as a whole arent important. They are. 

You can't say the run game literally doesn't matter, then follow up by giving examples of when or how it does/can matter.  

That is why I asked how literal we should be reading it.  To suggest the run game isn't that important, fair.  But to say it doesn't matter whatsoever?  I call BS on that.  Otherwise logic would follow that a team could run the ball 0 times in a season and still be just as productive.

The run game matters.  That doesn't mean it is going to be the difference between a 10-win season or a 5-win season.  Nor does it mean that it is going to be the difference between Dak being a good vs bad QB.  I agree with your point on that subject.  But it doesn't need to be two extremes.  The run game can be "mostly" irrelevant when it comes to the success of a QB, and yet also still be important in other aspects of the game.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, iknowcool said:

You can't say the run game literally doesn't matter, then follow up by giving examples of when or how it does/can matter.  

That is why I asked how literal we should be reading it.  To suggest the run game isn't that important, fair.  But to say it doesn't matter whatsoever?  I call BS on that.  Otherwise logic would follow that a team could run the ball 0 times in a season and still be just as productive.

The run game matters.  That doesn't mean it is going to be the difference between a 10-win season or a 5-win season.  Nor does it mean that it is going to be the difference between Dak being a good vs bad QB.  I agree with your point on that subject.  But it doesn't need to be two extremes.  The run game can be "mostly" irrelevant when it comes to the success of a QB, and yet also still be important in other aspects of the game.    

This is a fair retort and also accurate. I just like saying "the run game doesnt matter" because it makes  the boomers mad (looking at you @plan9misfit, still love you bud). The run game is situationally very important and my comments are hyperbole. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

QBs that have 200 yards, 1 TD and no turnovers win 95% of their games (the last time I looked it up, it was 98%, so I am guesstimating its still over 95%). RBs who rush for over 100 yards are almost 50/50 depending your time frame. Its not rocket science. Their are literally studies that show the run game in the first 50 minutes have between 0  and negative affect on you winning the game. @SkippyX's 120 yards doesnt count for the fact that teams run non stop once they are 10 points up.

Wild. Gibson's top games last year were 144, 111, 95, 90 and 88. We went 4-1 in those games.

I don't really have any of those Heinicke games to stack up against except Tampa and we won. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MikeT14 said:

Wild. Gibson's top games last year were 144, 111, 95, 90 and 88. We went 4-1 in those games.

I don't really have any of those Heinicke games to stack up against except Tampa and we won. 

70 v 40

110 v 90 (Taylor is the lower)

141 v 120

120 v 85

101 v 90

 

This is by passer rating (very flawed) but the numbers still line up. The QB with the better game won most of them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And before someone at's me, there is no correlation between YPG or yards per rush and any QB stat. Not even play action. You could play action to a full back or barry sanders and there is no difference in how a defense responds.

Largely because most football players are conditioned from 10 years old that if the ball looks like it is going to be ran, you step forward. If it looks like a pass you step back. So the agenda of play action is not dependent on the person toting the rock. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...