|
On February 06 2012 04:21 sleigh bells wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2012 04:19 GARO wrote:On February 06 2012 04:16 DEN1ED wrote:On February 06 2012 04:11 GARO wrote:On February 06 2012 04:08 DEN1ED wrote:On February 06 2012 04:06 Klive5ive wrote:On February 06 2012 04:04 sleigh bells wrote:On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote:
Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed. why yes http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/quarterbackRating/seasontype/2 Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare! Any statistic that has Romo at 4th is clearly flawed. Tony Romo isn't shit and sure he puts up good numbers but he isnt even in the top 10 QBs. Maybe once he stops throwing games away. Yeah, you're just delusional if you think Romo isn't at minimum a top 10 in this league. Care to name a QB that isn't both Manning brothers/Brady/Roethlisburger/Brees/Stafford who is better than him? I'll lol if you say Rivers as he is now. Top QBs lead their teams to the playoffs. There is no way cowboys should not make the playoffs with the talent they have and how "awesome" their QB is. Romo can put up all the numbers he wants but until he stops making terrible decisions with the game on the line it doesn't matter. Wow, are you actually trying to tell me Sanchez and Tebow are better QBs now because of the 'MAKE playoffs' criteria? Hahahaha, and it's not like Dallas had a straight up terrible D this year or anything, this coming from someone who lives in fucking New York and watches both the Giants and the Jets. it's his magic eyeball man. his eyeballs are better than any stat. don't forget alex smith is beastly too. alex smith, sanchez, TEBOW, and flacco are gods among men. no way none of those teams would drop them in a heartbeat if tony romo came a-calling.
Yes, actually watching games is relevant. Stats aren't everything. Do you think teams evaluate their players only based on stats? Romo just has moments where he goes full retard with the game on the line and I certainly wouldn't want that trait in my QB. Just look at game vs the Jets. And ya no way in hell the 49ers would drop Alex Smith for Romo.
|
On February 06 2012 04:21 sleigh bells wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2012 04:19 GARO wrote:On February 06 2012 04:16 DEN1ED wrote:On February 06 2012 04:11 GARO wrote:On February 06 2012 04:08 DEN1ED wrote:On February 06 2012 04:06 Klive5ive wrote:On February 06 2012 04:04 sleigh bells wrote:On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote:
Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed. why yes http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/quarterbackRating/seasontype/2 Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare! Any statistic that has Romo at 4th is clearly flawed. Tony Romo isn't shit and sure he puts up good numbers but he isnt even in the top 10 QBs. Maybe once he stops throwing games away. Yeah, you're just delusional if you think Romo isn't at minimum a top 10 in this league. Care to name a QB that isn't both Manning brothers/Brady/Roethlisburger/Brees/Stafford who is better than him? I'll lol if you say Rivers as he is now. Top QBs lead their teams to the playoffs. There is no way cowboys should not make the playoffs with the talent they have and how "awesome" their QB is. Romo can put up all the numbers he wants but until he stops making terrible decisions with the game on the line it doesn't matter. Wow, are you actually trying to tell me Sanchez and Tebow are better QBs now because of the 'MAKE playoffs' criteria? Hahahaha, and it's not like Dallas had a straight up terrible D this year or anything, this coming from someone who lives in fucking New York and watches both the Giants and the Jets. it's his magic eyeball man. his eyeballs are better than any stat. don't forget alex smith is beastly too. alex smith, sanchez, TEBOW, and flacco are gods among men. no way none of those teams would drop them in a heartbeat if tony romo came a-calling.
I would gladly take Alex Smith over Tony Romo. Romo shits away games far too often. Smith has learned to manage the game and won SF that game against the Saints. When Romo gets on the big stage like that, he falls apart.
QBs I would take over Romo:
Brady, Peyton, Eli, Vick, Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Stafford, Brees, Roethlisberger, Alex Smith, Cam Newton, Philip Rivers (everyone knows he is better than what happened this season, remember Eli's 25 int season?), Matt Schaub, Andy Dalton, and I will take Andrew Luck as well.
|
Although I'm not a massive fan, I'll go with what seems to be the safe bet (Pats). Hosting the SB Party at my place this year, I wonder if I randomly switch the game to LiquiD vs EG they would kill me or not. 
|
On February 06 2012 04:31 Slardar wrote:Although I'm not a massive fan, I'll go with what seems to be the safe bet (Pats). Hosting the SB Party at my place this year, I wonder if I randomly switch the game to LiquiD vs EG they would kill me or not.
Well you could surely convince them it's better than Madonna and squeeze some sneaky action in at half time.
|
You don't have permission to access "http://player.nbcsports.com/SNFPlayer.html?" on this server.
Reference #18.6ffeef50.1328470276.42c62f29
On msnbc...What a dissapointment T_t
|
On February 06 2012 04:32 Skeggaba wrote:
You don't have permission to access "http://player.nbcsports.com/SNFPlayer.html?" on this server.
Reference #18.6ffeef50.1328470276.42c62f29
On msnbc...What a dissapointment T_t
Not sure if you can access BBC iplayer in sweden but it will be on BBC1 and you can stream it live.
Im going to be finding a less legit way to watch it because the BBC one doesnt have the adverts in between plays, and thats half the fun of the superbowl.
Ill post when i have a stream and you can PM me for it if you want. Assuming thats allowed by the mods.
|
I really want to see Ochocinco catch the game winning touchdown, just for his celebration. Also looking forward to the commercials. Too bad Madonna sucks though.
|
should be a vote on ... WHO CARES also just saying cuzz both teams ew :D
|
I don't like either of those two teams, but as so many people seem to hate Tom Brady, I'm going to cheer for the Pats tonight 
|
United States10774 Posts
On February 06 2012 04:16 sleigh bells wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2012 04:13 OneOther wrote:On February 06 2012 04:06 Klive5ive wrote:On February 06 2012 04:04 sleigh bells wrote:On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote:
Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed. why yes http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/quarterbackRating/seasontype/2 Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare! Epic comeback? Are you like...serious? I thought you just made a point earlier about statistics being a bad measurement. This is the worst example possible. I don't understand how you make a statistical argument one way then use the same thing the other way hahaha. Ironic much. You have guys like Moore, Kolb and Cutler (who is a good quarterback but got injured halfway) up there with fewer than 200 passes attempted than Flacco. Vick? 100 fewer passes, fewer touchdowns and more interceptions than Flacco. Same story for Hasselback. you use numbers to fight numbers? you ignore flacco's dinky ass 6.6 YPA which means that he has those mediocre TD/INT and 57.6% completion rate even while playing the bus driver? that means he plays safer than even alex fucking smith...and still sucks. and any team would be stark raving mad to take flacco over andy dalton
okay, then we can agree that the quarterback ratings are terrible. how else would i point out that the statistics are a bad measurement other than pointing out why they are a bad measurement? how do you talk about the sky being blue without talking about sky and blue? what the fuck lol
and i would take his TD-INT ratio and total yards above the QBs I mentioned. So he's still above average.
|
United States10774 Posts
On February 06 2012 04:20 Klive5ive wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2012 04:13 OneOther wrote:On February 06 2012 04:06 Klive5ive wrote:On February 06 2012 04:04 sleigh bells wrote:On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote:
Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed. why yes http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/quarterbackRating/seasontype/2 Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare! Epic comeback? Are you like...serious? I thought you just made a point earlier about statistics being a bad measurement. This is the worst example possible. I don't understand how you make a statistical argument one way then use the same thing the other way hahaha. Ironic much. You have guys like Moore, Kolb and Cutler (who is a good quarterback but got injured halfway) up there with fewer than 200 passes attempted than Flacco. Vick? 100 fewer passes, fewer touchdowns and more interceptions than Flacco. Same story for Hasselback. Obviously QB rating is somewhat flawed. But you made it sound like it was impossible to consider Flacco average, like "lol you'll never name 16 QBs better than him" and then the NFLs own rating system has him at number 18. We're miles off topic now.
Because NFL rating system doesn't care about how many games a QB plays or how many passes he throws. Then where do you draw the arbitrary line of what's considered enough of a sample size? Based on NFL's QB rating, Matt Flynn would be the top quarterback in the league. This is obviously a clear statistical flaw and I am not sure how you manage to skip right over that onto your "epic comeback." Talk about being a statistician when it favors you lol
|
On February 06 2012 04:43 OneOther wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2012 04:16 sleigh bells wrote:On February 06 2012 04:13 OneOther wrote:On February 06 2012 04:06 Klive5ive wrote:On February 06 2012 04:04 sleigh bells wrote:On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote:
Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed. why yes http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/quarterbackRating/seasontype/2 Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare! Epic comeback? Are you like...serious? I thought you just made a point earlier about statistics being a bad measurement. This is the worst example possible. I don't understand how you make a statistical argument one way then use the same thing the other way hahaha. Ironic much. You have guys like Moore, Kolb and Cutler (who is a good quarterback but got injured halfway) up there with fewer than 200 passes attempted than Flacco. Vick? 100 fewer passes, fewer touchdowns and more interceptions than Flacco. Same story for Hasselback. you use numbers to fight numbers? you ignore flacco's dinky ass 6.6 YPA which means that he has those mediocre TD/INT and 57.6% completion rate even while playing the bus driver? that means he plays safer than even alex fucking smith...and still sucks. and any team would be stark raving mad to take flacco over andy dalton okay, then we can agree that the quarterback ratings are terrible. how else would i point out that the statistics are a bad measurement other than pointing out why they are a bad measurement? how do you talk about the sky being blue without talking about sky and blue? what the fuck lol and i would take his TD-INT ratio and total yards above the QBs I mentioned. So he's still above average.
QBR is a collection of all the stats you talked about, that's why, including TD-INT. TD-INT doesn't mean shit if you complete 4 yards an attempt. you can cherry pick the stats within QBR all you want, but TD-INT is not a valid criticism of the QB ratings, that's what i mean. unless you are complaining about how it is weighted, in which case you probably have no idea how much weight it gets.
and no, QBR is fine. there's no better way to talk about stats besides HURR DURR TD-INT IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS (or hurr durr, YPA is the only thing that matters).
and fine, flacco is around average.
|
On February 06 2012 04:45 OneOther wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2012 04:20 Klive5ive wrote:On February 06 2012 04:13 OneOther wrote:On February 06 2012 04:06 Klive5ive wrote:On February 06 2012 04:04 sleigh bells wrote:On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote:
Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed. why yes http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/quarterbackRating/seasontype/2 Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare! Epic comeback? Are you like...serious? I thought you just made a point earlier about statistics being a bad measurement. This is the worst example possible. I don't understand how you make a statistical argument one way then use the same thing the other way hahaha. Ironic much. You have guys like Moore, Kolb and Cutler (who is a good quarterback but got injured halfway) up there with fewer than 200 passes attempted than Flacco. Vick? 100 fewer passes, fewer touchdowns and more interceptions than Flacco. Same story for Hasselback. Obviously QB rating is somewhat flawed. But you made it sound like it was impossible to consider Flacco average, like "lol you'll never name 16 QBs better than him" and then the NFLs own rating system has him at number 18. We're miles off topic now. Because NFL rating system doesn't care about how many games a QB plays or how many passes he throws. Then where do you draw the arbitrary line of what's considered enough of a sample size? Based on NFL's QB rating, Matt Flynn would be the top quarterback in the league. This is obviously a clear statistical flaw and I am not sure how you manage to skip right over that onto your "epic comeback." Talk about being a statistician when it favors you lol
um which is why flynn is not on that list? as well as anyone who attempted less than 200 passes?
|
United States10774 Posts
Yep, it's not hard to read a chart. FBO has him at #14, which I see as being reasonable. Above the middle, move on
|
wonder wht trainwreck they got to perform this yr heh
|
United States10774 Posts
On February 06 2012 04:49 sleigh bells wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2012 04:45 OneOther wrote:On February 06 2012 04:20 Klive5ive wrote:On February 06 2012 04:13 OneOther wrote:On February 06 2012 04:06 Klive5ive wrote:On February 06 2012 04:04 sleigh bells wrote:On February 06 2012 04:01 OneOther wrote:
Flacco played superbly in the first three quarters (better than Tom) and he's certainly above average. What the fuck are you talking about? Can you name 16 quarterbacks who are better than Flacco?
Denver relies on low scoring games with defense playing well and grinding out the clock with its running game. Well, its defense failed so they got destroyed. why yes http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/quarterbackRating/seasontype/2 Lol that is a pretty epic comeback. You've even got 1 QB to spare! Epic comeback? Are you like...serious? I thought you just made a point earlier about statistics being a bad measurement. This is the worst example possible. I don't understand how you make a statistical argument one way then use the same thing the other way hahaha. Ironic much. You have guys like Moore, Kolb and Cutler (who is a good quarterback but got injured halfway) up there with fewer than 200 passes attempted than Flacco. Vick? 100 fewer passes, fewer touchdowns and more interceptions than Flacco. Same story for Hasselback. Obviously QB rating is somewhat flawed. But you made it sound like it was impossible to consider Flacco average, like "lol you'll never name 16 QBs better than him" and then the NFLs own rating system has him at number 18. We're miles off topic now. Because NFL rating system doesn't care about how many games a QB plays or how many passes he throws. Then where do you draw the arbitrary line of what's considered enough of a sample size? Based on NFL's QB rating, Matt Flynn would be the top quarterback in the league. This is obviously a clear statistical flaw and I am not sure how you manage to skip right over that onto your "epic comeback." Talk about being a statistician when it favors you lol um which is why flynn is not on that list? as well as anyone who attempted less than 200 passes?
That's what I mean when I say 200 is just an arbitrary number. There's guys who have attempted half the passes Flacco has. Flynn is an extreme example of the arbitrary line I am talking about. No shit he's not on the list
|
QBR is shit and always has been. Trying to quantify everything just doesn't work out. Quite frankly statistics themselves are just overrated. Watch the games, you will see who the best players are. QBR tells us that Tony Romo is the 4th best QB in the league. I'm sorry, but thats just not true. Anyone who knows anything about football knows this.
|
On February 06 2012 04:50 sung_moon wrote:
wonder wht trainwreck they got to perform this yr heh
how do you not know Madonna is the half time show?
|
It's okay. Brady's getting Ring #4, just like Bradshaw did back in '79 .
( •_•) It looks like Eli..
( •_•)>⌐■-■
(⌐■_■) Is about to get some Patriotic treatment.
YEEEEAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
|
On February 06 2012 04:31 Slardar wrote:Although I'm not a massive fan, I'll go with what seems to be the safe bet (Pats). Hosting the SB Party at my place this year, I wonder if I randomly switch the game to LiquiD vs EG they would kill me or not.
Patriots aren't a safe bet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
