The 2006 Season Truth and Reconciliation Thread

Smitty had more than the usual number of drops.

 

That's interesting info; along those same lines....

In W's we rushed for an avg of 131.8.

In L's it was 75.6.

In W's we gave up 67.8 yards rushing.

In L's it was 149.4.

In W's we didn't make to 100 yards only twice; and never gave up 100 yards.

In L's we rushed over 100 yards three times and held the opp. under 100 once.

 

i like you i want to have ur babies

however you must know that carr is better for this team...younger, faster, tight...jake is a decent backup at this point in his carear but no longer capable of being a starter i would be ok if we maid him our holder

 

Shhh... you aren't supposed to mention that kind of stuff. You're only supposed to remember Johnson dropping a possible TD pass (of course Smith killed a drive inside Dallas territory on a pass that hit him in the hands) and to make sure Johnson takes a bullet for Delhomie's bad passes at Cincy and Philadelphia (let's not talk about the dead duck he chucked up at Washington).

 

not 'we' - you. And we've already established that you're well past biased.

 

The whole team seemed to lack cohesion last year. I wondered about it at the time. We had the ammunition, but were shooting blanks.

I wonder if any of it was due to the rumored devisiveness that Key supposedly caused. Whatever the case, Key is gone and Henning is gone, so if Jake flubs it this year, there will be nothing to pin it on but him.

 

yeah, in wins we scored more points than the other team. In losses we scored less.



Jake had his crappy moments last year. It was a year of regression after two very good years. There were points of regression for a lot of other issues last year, too. Somehow, some people completely neglect to remember major downturns in other major stat categories.

And to this point, right now, no one's been able to explain the 3rd down problem.

 

Predictability

 

Jake's wife.

And by the way, Jake's wife, SI had an article a couple of years back on common misuse of statistics and correlations. I believe it was by Dr. Z, and one of the things he pointed out was how certain individuals harp on the idea that teams win more when they run more. The shocking thing, and I think you'll agree that this is a shocking idea that never would have occurred to you naturally, is that teams actually run more when they have the lead. So, you know, they tend to call more running plays and gain more rushing yardage in games where they had a lead, which just so happen to often be games that those teams actually win. Now that's not to say that running effectiveness has nothing to do with winning. Quite the contrary, but I think you might want to think a little more about what you consider self-evident. It could be that you're looking a little silly by failing to consider something that seems pretty obvious in hindsight.

 

Look man...this shit is coming from all over....even the so-called experts are questioning our QB slot. And you really should avoid calling ANYONE biased. You love Jake...right, wrong or indifferent, you're at least as biased as anyone here.