Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from SnarkPatrol. Show SnarkPatrol's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to glenr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Classic 'nothing going on in the NFL' thread.

    [/QUOTE]


    Classic 'nothing going on between my ears' post.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to garytx's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Interesting question, huh? Why the apparent double standard? 

    I have my theories, but I'll let others answer first.  One hint:  I think it's more about offensive strategy and what the running and passing games are supposed to do in that strategy than it is about the players.

    [/QUOTE]

    Geez Pro, I thought that this was a Rusty post!  I'm surprised at the question.  The QB has many  responsibilities.  An interception could happen a number of ways.  Ball being tipped, WR running the wrong route or simply not holding on to the ball.  Comparing a RB duties to a QB's is apples and oranges.  

    [/QUOTE]

    I figured Rusty would jump in with something about Brady's ego . . . which would be nonsense of course, but funny to watch . . . 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from FishTaco64. Show FishTaco64's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    Doesn't Brady have the 2nd lowest INT rate ever? And the only guy ahead of him has only been starting about half as long? 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from soxrockursox. Show soxrockursox's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    Rusty is that you Rusty ?Come out where ever you are.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    I can think of a few reasons...Brady handles the ball maybe 50-60 times a game, if Ridley did that he'd lose the ball...I mean like actually lose the thing. Big difference.

    You can also add that they play different positions, where one guy at his position (Brady) is always the best in the league of NOT throwing interceptions...and then you have the other guy (Ridley) who is at or near the top in the league for turnovers when considering how often he actually carries the ball. You can also say that if you take brady out of the game you'd be removing our best player - you can't say that for Ridley. Brady produces somewhere around 4000k yards of offense a year...Ridely (on a good year) produces 1200. Brady throws for 23-33 touchdowns a year...Ridley carries for 5-9 touchdowns.

    And I realize the whole thread is a joke, but I just wanted to chime in anyway.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Interesting question, huh? Why the apparent double standard? 

    I have my theories, but I'll let others answer first.  One hint:  I think it's more about offensive strategy and what the running and passing games are supposed to do in that strategy than it is about the players.

    [/QUOTE]

    I really dont mean any disrespect but I dont think it an interesting question. First of all teams generally only have one starting caliber QB and in this case we have a HIF caliber QB. You dont take them out for a bad pass or two. Furthermore not all picks are the fault of the QB but lets keep it to only those that are... Sometimes the QB is having to try to do too much because they NEED to make up for weaknesses in the team... they need to make up the difference and play big.

    THere are QBs who should not be left in. But they are generally learning and then you want them to learn by playing not watching (if they are your starter of today). And you dont want them worried about being taken out and so affecting their play. But there are times and players... not with your only starter and certainly not with a HOF.

    I could talk about other aspects but this is the bottom line.

    No disresepct...

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I can think of a few reasons...Brady handles the ball maybe 50-60 times a game, if Ridley did that he'd lose the ball...I mean like actually lose the thing. Big difference.

    You can also add that they play different positions, where one guy at his position (Brady) is always the best in the league of NOT throwing interceptions...and then you have the other guy (Ridley) who is at or near the top in the league for turnovers when considering how often he actually carries the ball. You can also say that if you take brady out of the game you'd be removing our best player - you can't say that for Ridley. Brady produces somewhere around 4000k yards of offense a year...Ridely (on a good year) produces 1200. Brady throws for 23-33 touchdowns a year...Ridley carries for 5-9 touchdowns.

    And I realize the whole thread is a joke, but I just wanted to chime in anyway.

    [/QUOTE]

    Actually, it's not a joke.  It was a way to prompt people to think more deeply about the differences between the passing and running games and why a turnover in one seems to be treated by Belichick as so much worse than a turnover in the other. 

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Interesting question, huh? Why the apparent double standard? 

    I have my theories, but I'll let others answer first.  One hint:  I think it's more about offensive strategy and what the running and passing games are supposed to do in that strategy than it is about the players.

    [/QUOTE]

    I really dont mean any disrespect but I dont think it an interesting question. First of all teams generally only have one starting caliber QB and in this case we have a HIF caliber QB. You dont take them out for a bad pass or two. Furthermore not all picks are the fault of the QB but lets keep it to only those that are... Sometimes the QB is having to try to do too much because they NEED to make up for weaknesses in the team... they need to make up the difference and play big.

    THere are QBs who should not be left in. But they are generally learning and then you want them to learn by playing not watching (if they are your starter of today). And you dont want them worried about being taken out and so affecting their play. But there are times and players... not with your only starter and certainly not with a HOF.

    I could talk about other aspects but this is the bottom line.

    No disresepct...

    [/QUOTE]

    Yet it's gotten quite a response . . . even some pretty emotional ones.  It certainly was at least provocative if not interesting.

    Personally, I think it's always interesting to question things we just take for granted.  It often uncovers preconceptions--sometimes incorrect ones--that we never even knew we held.

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Interesting question, huh? Why the apparent double standard? 

    I have my theories, but I'll let others answer first.  One hint:  I think it's more about offensive strategy and what the running and passing games are supposed to do in that strategy than it is about the players.

    [/QUOTE]

    I really dont mean any disrespect but I dont think it an interesting question. First of all teams generally only have one starting caliber QB and in this case we have a HIF caliber QB. You dont take them out for a bad pass or two. Furthermore not all picks are the fault of the QB but lets keep it to only those that are... Sometimes the QB is having to try to do too much because they NEED to make up for weaknesses in the team... they need to make up the difference and play big.

    THere are QBs who should not be left in. But they are generally learning and then you want them to learn by playing not watching (if they are your starter of today). And you dont want them worried about being taken out and so affecting their play. But there are times and players... not with your only starter and certainly not with a HOF.

    I could talk about other aspects but this is the bottom line.

    No disresepct...

    [/QUOTE]

    Yet it's gotten quite a response . . . even some pretty emotional ones.  It certainly was at least provocative if not interesting.

    Personally, I think it's always interesting to question things we just take for granted.  It often uncovers preconceptions--sometimes incorrect ones--that we never even knew we held.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I am not sure you didnt get resposnes BECAUSE the question - on the face of it mind you - was weak and so people jumped on you.

    BUT - as you later clarified your point was more about differentiating and correlating the nature of risk and reward (something I make a living doing). So I would say that the question was not as good as the idea.. the intent. Nit picking perhaps...

    In any case it is important to take reward into account. When we play top defenses our running game is noticably weaker. THe implication is that we need better blocking in order to make the reward of running meaningful in those big games (come playoff time you will likely eventually run into one or two superior Ds). Same goes for our pass blocking.

    This is why I beleive that on both sides of the ball we should go strong on upgrading the O and D line. THat also would give Ridley and other RBs the comfort of focusing on the ball a little more as the line will help make things happen.

    There is a bit of a parallel with an RB thinking he has to make things happen and a QB who tries to do too much. THey both take extra risks. When your blocking is better you can do more without taking the extra risk.

    And on the other team needs to take those extra risks because you have made it very hard for them to succeed without upping the risk level.

     

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I am not sure you didnt get resposnes BECAUSE the question - on the face of it mind you - was weak and so people jumped on you.

    It was intended to be like one of those odd bonus questions professors sometimes put on exams just to provoke thought and see what clever responses they can elicit.  We all take it for granted that Brady is more valuable than Ridley (he is) and assume that that alone explains the differential treatment.  But the hope was people would actually pause a moment and think a bit more deeply, "Hmm, why wouldn't one turnover be just as bad as another?"  Sure Brady is a great QB and Ridley an average running back.  Running backs are now a dime a dozen and great QBs are almost impossible to find.  All that's true.  But anyone who has observed Belichick knows he really doesn't treat players differently because of those kinds of things.  All he cares about is whether a player is helping the team or hurting the team.  If running and passing turnovers were equally bad, Belichick is the kind of guy who would come down just as hard on Brady as he would on Ridley. 

    If we think Belichick isn't sentimental and isn't swayed by a players' past contributions, you have to ask why does Belichick seem to react so much more aggressively when running backs fumble than when QBs throw interceptions? He did the same with Maroney that he's done with Ridley, after all, and I'm sure there are other examples.  But interceptions are far more common than fumbles . . . and are probably more likely to be returned for scores too, so how could they be less damaging than fumbles? 


    The differences, I think, lie in a few things, many of which were pointed out in the responses above. But the most important difference, I think, is simply a risk-reward calculation.  Passing does actually have a higher risk of turnover than running (Babe points that out quite well).  But its rewards are so much greater that the higher risk is tolerable.  Running on the other hand has lower rewards, so it is essential to keep the risk to the absolute minimum.  Fumbles are probably slightly more preventable than interceptions, and given the low-reward characteristic of the run, holding on to the ball has to be priority number one for running backs.  Once running backs start turning over the ball running's one advantage over the pass--it's reliability--ceases to exist.  The run is like a T-Bill.  It doesn't earn you a lot of money, but it's a safe place to hold your money.  But if it suddenly gets as risky as small-cap stock while retaining just a T-Bill return, it's not where you want to invest.  The pass, on the other hand--with its stock-like returns--comes with greater risk.  But you tolerate that risk because those big returns are what really make you your money over time. 

     

     

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I am not sure you didnt get resposnes BECAUSE the question - on the face of it mind you - was weak and so people jumped on you.

    It was intended to be like one of those odd bonus questions professors sometimes put on exams just to provoke thought and see what clever responses they can elicit.  We all take it for granted that Brady is more valuable than Ridley (he is) and assume that that alone explains the differential treatment.  But the hope was people would actually pause a moment and think a bit more deeply, "Hmm, why wouldn't one turnover be just as bad as another?"  Sure Brady is a great QB and Ridley an average running back.  Running backs are now a dime a dozen and great QBs are almost impossible to find.  All that's true.  But anyone who has observed Belichick knows he really doesn't treat players differently because of those kinds of things.  All he cares about is whether a player is helping the team or hurting the team.  If running and passing turnovers were equally bad, Belichick is the kind of guy who would come down just as hard on Brady as he would on Ridley. 

    If we think Belichick isn't sentimental and isn't swayed by a players' past contributions, you have to ask why does Belichick seem to react so much more aggressively when running backs fumble than when QBs throw interceptions? He did the same with Maroney that he's done with Ridley, after all, and I'm sure there are other examples.  But interceptions are far more common than fumbles . . . and are probably more likely to be returned for scores too, so how could they be less damaging than fumbles? 


    The differences, I think, lie in a few things, many of which were pointed out in the responses above. But the most important difference, I think, is simply a risk-reward calculation.  Passing does actually have a higher risk of turnover than running (Babe points that out quite well).  But its rewards are so much greater that the higher risk is tolerable.  Running on the other hand has lower rewards, so it is essential to keep the risk to the absolute minimum.  Fumbles are probably slightly more preventable than interceptions, and given the low-reward characteristic of the run, holding on to the ball has to be priority number one for running backs.  Once running backs start turning over the ball running's one advantage over the pass--it's reliability--ceases to exist.  The run is like a T-Bill.  It doesn't earn you a lot of money, but it's a safe place to hold your money.  But if it suddenly gets as risky as small-cap stock while retaining just a T-Bill return, it's not where you want to invest.  The pass, on the other hand--with its stock-like returns--comes with greater risk.  But you tolerate that risk because those big returns are what really make you your money over time. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes.

    And so my remarks about the implications of making both the running game rewards greater AND making the opponent's running game rewards less great.

    And making the risk less high in our passing game and more in theirs.

    This supports my premise that we should be upgrading the quality, the domance, of our O and D lines as they are what will impact these elements.

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    I just don't get this thread,

    so BB is supposed to pull a qb with the lowest int % of alltime,  and replace him with who exactly?

    And if BB then doesn't want ANY INTs he could just tell the Qb not to ever pass. but if he did this he wouldn't have to pull TB , now would he?

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I just don't get this thread,

    so BB is supposed to pull a qb with the lowest int % of alltime,  and replace him with who exactly?

    And if BB then doesn't want ANY INTs he could just tell the Qb not to ever pass. but if he did this he wouldn't have to pull TB , now would he?

    [/QUOTE]

    Apparently that's because you didn't read it.  

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Babe is on the right track,as is Philski. The real reason I believe is because running the ball is a low reward play that makes sense only if it's also low risk.  Fumbling on running plays destroys the strategic advantages of running because it turns it into a high risk play.  Passing is always riskier, but it's also high reward.  Interceptions aren't good, but given the rewards of passing they are a tolerable risk.  Given the lower rewards of running, fumbles are an intolerable risk.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah, we should probably just do away with the whole run game thing.

    Too risky!

    If we upped our 285 passes to 111 runs in our last 6 playoff losses to something like 375 passes to 21 runs we would have minimized intolerable risk and assumed a more tolerable risk!

    You are really on your game lately.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I just don't get this thread,

    so BB is supposed to pull a qb with the lowest int % of alltime,  and replace him with who exactly?

    And if BB then doesn't want ANY INTs he could just tell the Qb not to ever pass. but if he did this he wouldn't have to pull TB , now would he?

    [/QUOTE]

    Apparently that's because you didn't read it.  

    [/QUOTE]

    No the title to the thread is a misnomer

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Babe is on the right track,as is Philski. The real reason I believe is because running the ball is a low reward play that makes sense only if it's also low risk.  Fumbling on running plays destroys the strategic advantages of running because it turns it into a high risk play.  Passing is always riskier, but it's also high reward.  Interceptions aren't good, but given the rewards of passing they are a tolerable risk.  Given the lower rewards of running, fumbles are an intolerable risk.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah, we should probably just do away with the whole run game thing.

    Too risky!

    If we upped our 285 passes to 111 runs in our last 6 playoff losses to something like 375 passes to 21 runs we would have minimized intolerable risk and assumed a more tolerable risk!

    You are really on your game lately.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm sure you know how to manage a playoff game better than Bill Belichick.

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Babe is on the right track,as is Philski. The real reason I believe is because running the ball is a low reward play that makes sense only if it's also low risk.  Fumbling on running plays destroys the strategic advantages of running because it turns it into a high risk play.  Passing is always riskier, but it's also high reward.  Interceptions aren't good, but given the rewards of passing they are a tolerable risk.  Given the lower rewards of running, fumbles are an intolerable risk.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah, we should probably just do away with the whole run game thing.

    Too risky!

    If we upped our 285 passes to 111 runs in our last 6 playoff losses to something like 375 passes to 21 runs we would have minimized intolerable risk and assumed a more tolerable risk!

    You are really on your game lately.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm sure you know how to manage a playoff game better than Bill Belichick.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I was sure this thread couldn't get any more embarassing for you...until your weak effort above.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Babe is on the right track,as is Philski. The real reason I believe is because running the ball is a low reward play that makes sense only if it's also low risk.  Fumbling on running plays destroys the strategic advantages of running because it turns it into a high risk play.  Passing is always riskier, but it's also high reward.  Interceptions aren't good, but given the rewards of passing they are a tolerable risk.  Given the lower rewards of running, fumbles are an intolerable risk.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah, we should probably just do away with the whole run game thing.

    Too risky!

    If we upped our 285 passes to 111 runs in our last 6 playoff losses to something like 375 passes to 21 runs we would have minimized intolerable risk and assumed a more tolerable risk!

    You are really on your game lately.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm sure you know how to manage a playoff game better than Bill Belichick.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I was sure this thread couldn't get any more embarassing for you...until your weak effort above.

    [/QUOTE]

    Maybe you can repeat those pass run numbers again.  

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    Hmm, I don't think the play calling of the bronco game was the problem. I have thought it was the Oline , definitely the run and some pass, along with the injuries on D that was the problem

    I f you were trying yo make a point Pro, I admit it went right over my head ,lol

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Hmm, I don't think the play calling of the bronco game was the problem. I have thought it was the Oline , definitely the run and some pass, along with the injuries on D that was the problem

    I f you were trying yo make a point Pro, I admit it went right over my head ,lol

    [/QUOTE]

    I think you are right.  Play calling is almost never the issue with the Pats.  It's always things like injuries, some talent issues, and execution.  I think this is likely the best coached team in NFL history.

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Babe is on the right track,as is Philski. The real reason I believe is because running the ball is a low reward play that makes sense only if it's also low risk.  Fumbling on running plays destroys the strategic advantages of running because it turns it into a high risk play.  Passing is always riskier, but it's also high reward.  Interceptions aren't good, but given the rewards of passing they are a tolerable risk.  Given the lower rewards of running, fumbles are an intolerable risk.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah, we should probably just do away with the whole run game thing.

    Too risky!

    If we upped our 285 passes to 111 runs in our last 6 playoff losses to something like 375 passes to 21 runs we would have minimized intolerable risk and assumed a more tolerable risk!

    You are really on your game lately.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm sure you know how to manage a playoff game better than Bill Belichick.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I was sure this thread couldn't get any more embarassing for you...until your weak effort above.

    [/QUOTE]

    Maybe you can repeat those pass run numbers again.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Why? You won't address them.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Babe is on the right track,as is Philski. The real reason I believe is because running the ball is a low reward play that makes sense only if it's also low risk.  Fumbling on running plays destroys the strategic advantages of running because it turns it into a high risk play.  Passing is always riskier, but it's also high reward.  Interceptions aren't good, but given the rewards of passing they are a tolerable risk.  Given the lower rewards of running, fumbles are an intolerable risk.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah, we should probably just do away with the whole run game thing.

    Too risky!

    If we upped our 285 passes to 111 runs in our last 6 playoff losses to something like 375 passes to 21 runs we would have minimized intolerable risk and assumed a more tolerable risk!

    You are really on your game lately.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm sure you know how to manage a playoff game better than Bill Belichick.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I was sure this thread couldn't get any more embarassing for you...until your weak effort above.

    [/QUOTE]

    Maybe you can repeat those pass run numbers again.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Why? You won't address them.

    [/QUOTE]

    I've addressed them plenty of times.  I've told you they are mostly the result of game situations.  But you insist on using them as examples of the Patriots' ineptitude in game planning and play calling.  We just disagree.  I think Bill Belichick does the right thing and you think he does the wrong thing.  

    That's what it boils down too.  I try to understand the logic behind what Belichick does because I believe he knows more about football than me (or you) and that he almost always does the right thing. You on the other hand whine about Bill Belichick doing the wrong thing because you apparently think you know better than he does what should be done.  

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Babe is on the right track,as is Philski. The real reason I believe is because running the ball is a low reward play that makes sense only if it's also low risk.  Fumbling on running plays destroys the strategic advantages of running because it turns it into a high risk play.  Passing is always riskier, but it's also high reward.  Interceptions aren't good, but given the rewards of passing they are a tolerable risk.  Given the lower rewards of running, fumbles are an intolerable risk.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah, we should probably just do away with the whole run game thing.

    Too risky!

    If we upped our 285 passes to 111 runs in our last 6 playoff losses to something like 375 passes to 21 runs we would have minimized intolerable risk and assumed a more tolerable risk!

    You are really on your game lately.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm sure you know how to manage a playoff game better than Bill Belichick.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I was sure this thread couldn't get any more embarassing for you...until your weak effort above.

    [/QUOTE]

    Maybe you can repeat those pass run numbers again.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Why? You won't address them.

    [/QUOTE]

    I've addressed them plenty of times.  I've told you they are mostly the result of game situations.  But you insist on using them as examples of the Patriots' ineptitude in game planning and play calling.  We just disagree.  I think Bill Belichick does the right thing and you think he does the wrong thing.  

    That's what it boils down too.  I try to understand the logic behind what Belichick does because I believe he knows more about football than me (or you) and that he almost always does the right thing. You on the other hand whine about Bill Belichick doing the wrong thing because you apparently think you know better than he does what should be done.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Oh, that's right. The greatest coach in NFL history was forced into being 1 dimensional for 6 straight playoff losses due to game situation. You're en fuego.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Why does BB forgive Brady's interceptions but bench Ridley for fumbling?

    In response to bostonfan191646's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Interesting question, huh? Why the apparent double standard? 

    I have my theories, but I'll let others answer first.  One hint:  I think it's more about offensive strategy and what the running and passing games are supposed to do in that strategy than it is about the players.

    [/QUOTE]

    This is the stupidest thing ever asked. Ever

    [/QUOTE]

    Given some of the Pullitzer Prize winning posts I've read on this board that is a major leagues statement right there.

     

Share