Jump to content

Conference Championships


Leader

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

According to the MacReady Hypothesis, get ready for a SF vs. Balt. Super Bowl. 

Yep, Mahomes at 16.4% would make him my undisputed GOAT. To be able to do it twice in a row above 16% when no other QB had legally done it over 13% would make him the most capable of overcoming team shortcomings of all time. You see it with his receiving corps. Straight butt corps. It would be an achievement beyond expectations. Every single year Brady was over 12% he failed to reach the Super Bowl much less win it.

Unfortunately for the Lions, Goff is at 13%. Would really love for the Lions to win a Super Bowl. Any year the Packers are out of it, I automatically root for the team with the lowest amount of Super Bowl wins.

Jackson I didn't think it was remotely possible. Then I found out his new deal didn't really kick into gear until next year. I kept saying the Ravens were going to fail miserably in the postseason because I was looking at his cap hit for next year and comparing it to this year. Next year he's over 14%. He's great and has come a long way as an actual QB, but he's not 14% good. He's just a hair over 9% this year.

Brock Purdy at .4% is the most obvious discount. That's not 4%, that's under half a percent of the salary cap, which has allowed the Niners to add and maintain the NFL's best left tackle, an incredible defense, incredible tight end, incredible running back, amazing receiving corps... If any elite QB was on that team that team would win three straight Super Bowls. But no elite QB could be on that team because that team does not exist without all those cap savings.

So yeah. The only bad look for my hypothesis is a Chiefs/Lions Super Bowl, which would guarantee a second straight year of it being done. A Ravens/Niners Super Bowl and it's 30 to 1.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MacReady said:

Yep, Mahomes at 16.4% would make him my undisputed GOAT. To be able to do it twice in a row above 16% when no other QB had legally done it over 13% would make him the most capable of overcoming team shortcomings of all time. You see it with his receiving corps. Straight butt corps. It would be an achievement beyond expectations. Every single year Brady was over 12% he failed to reach the Super Bowl much less win it.

Unfortunately for the Lions, Goff is at 13%. Would really love for the Lions to win a Super Bowl. Any year the Packers are out of it, I automatically root for the team with the lowest amount of Super Bowl wins.

Jackson I didn't think it was remotely possible. Then I found out his new deal didn't really kick into gear until next year. I kept saying the Ravens were going to fail miserably in the postseason because I was looking at his cap hit for next year and comparing it to this year. Next year he's over 14%. He's great and has come a long way as an actual QB, but he's not 14% good. He's just a hair over 9% this year.

Brock Purdy at .4% is the most obvious discount. That's not 4%, that's under half a percent of the salary cap, which has allowed the Niners to add and maintain the NFL's best left tackle, an incredible defense, incredible tight end, incredible running back, amazing receiving corps... If any elite QB was on that team that team would win three straight Super Bowls. But no elite QB could be on that team because that team does not exist without all those cap savings.

So yeah. The only bad look for my hypothesis is a Chiefs/Lions Super Bowl, which would guarantee a second straight year of it being done. A Ravens/Niners Super Bowl and it's 30 to 1.

 

Maybe it shouldn't be a 12% either, or. But rather as the cap % goes up from 0 to total cap, the chance of winning the SB goes down on a sliding scale. If we had some Math people here they could create a formula where the QB cap number (including dead QB cap--which GB had plenty of) for both teams could be plugged into the formula and a prediction could be calculated. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

Maybe it shouldn't be a 12% either, or. But rather as the cap % goes up from 0 to total cap, the chance of winning the SB goes down on a sliding scale. If we had some Math people here they could create a formula where the QB cap number (including dead QB cap--which GB had plenty of) for both teams could be plugged into the formula and a prediction could be calculated. 

Dead cap doesn't count (I forget why). But the true disciples of MacReadism practice that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

Dead cap doesn't count (I forget why). But the true disciples of MacReadism practice that.

Dead cap doesn't get added into the QB cap hit. Because why would it? Dead cap is dead. It's like counting injured players.

Jokes aside, cap hit counts. I just got sick of people acting like the Rams proved the theory is wrong. It's not wrong. There is a number you aim to keep your quarterback's cap hit below.

Nobody understands hyperbole here and they like to act like I've said it's impossible. Clearly it's not impossible. It's like posting online, "You cannot survive a fall from an airplane without a parachute." You'll have ten thousand people respond, "DeR Vesna Vulovic did it!" Then you'll say, "Okay, do you think jumping from a plane without a parachute is a good idea?" "Vesna Vulovic did it!" "Out of 487 failed parachutes, 486 people have died. Would you recommend jumping out of an airplane with a faulty parachute?" "Vesna Vulovic survived!" "Do you want to have a conversation about this?" "Vesna Vulovic survived!"

I understand my style is very stubborn and to the point and I rub a lot of people the wrong way. When I look at something with a 29/1 failure rating, I tend to say, "You can't do this." Other people repeat, "It can be done and it has no bearing!"

It gets old. They're so desperate to disprove a theory because they know I'm right, yet they hate that I'm right so they point to the exceptions and say the whole theory is wrong because of the exceptions.

In the case of Mahomes, yep. That was the exception. Mahomes had an incredible postseason. His team still won three games by a field goal and a single solitary mistake wipes it out. The Rams had a massive dead cap. They overcame it by mortgaging their entire future, betting the prime of several elite players and trading away two years worth of draft classes. They're five years away from competing again. Minimum. They also had three games decided by a field goal.

It's not an ideal approach. So when I say it can't be done I mean it in the same way one cannot survive a fall from an airplane without a parachute, and some people take offense to that.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, MacReady said:

Dead cap doesn't get added into the QB cap hit. Because why would it? Dead cap is dead. It's like counting injured players.

Jokes aside, cap hit counts

Cap hit counts.... but dead cap hit doesn't. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, MacReady said:

Dead cap doesn't get added into the QB cap hit. Because why would it? Dead cap is dead. It's like counting injured players.

Jokes aside, cap hit counts. I just got sick of people acting like the Rams proved the theory is wrong. It's not wrong. There is a number you aim to keep your quarterback's cap hit below.

Nobody understands hyperbole here and they like to act like I've said it's impossible. Clearly it's not impossible. It's like posting online, "You cannot survive a fall from an airplane without a parachute." You'll have ten thousand people respond, "DeR Vesna Vulovic did it!" Then you'll say, "Okay, do you think jumping from a plane without a parachute is a good idea?" "Vesna Vulovic did it!" "Out of 487 failed parachutes, 486 people have died. Would you recommend jumping out of an airplane with a faulty parachute?" "Vesna Vulovic survived!" "Do you want to have a conversation about this?" "Vesna Vulovic survived!"

I understand my style is very stubborn and to the point and I rub a lot of people the wrong way. When I look at something with a 29/1 failure rating, I tend to say, "You can't do this." Other people repeat, "It can be done and it has no bearing!"

It gets old. They're so desperate to disprove a theory because they know I'm right, yet they hate that I'm right so they point to the exceptions and say the whole theory is wrong because of the exceptions.

In the case of Mahomes, yep. That was the exception. Mahomes had an incredible postseason. His team still won three games by a field goal and a single solitary mistake wipes it out. The Rams had a massive dead cap. They overcame it by mortgaging their entire future, betting the prime of several elite players and trading away two years worth of draft classes. They're five years away from competing again. Minimum. They also had three games decided by a field goal.

It's not an ideal approach. So when I say it can't be done I mean it in the same way one cannot survive a fall from an airplane without a parachute, and some people take offense to that.

I am like a 90% believer of MacReadism

  • Like 1
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...