NFL 2015

[crimsonfloyd]

And you'll keep generalizing when necessary, and hyper focused cherry picking when necessary, and mentioning big games from the Cousins of the world and ignoring the not-big games of the Lucks, and patting yourself on the back the whole time.

In other words, I have supported my position with evidence on both the micro level (Eagles had terrible defensive games at both the beginning and end of the year) and the macro level (Eagles allowed more or less the same amount of points in the beginning and end of the season) and somehow that's poor argumentation on my part?

How about an apples to apples comparison, or at least the closest thing available in an NFL season: Division games. Dallas played the Eagles late on the season, so can't use that (although Dallas was worn out on the insane turn around - was funny to watch all the crowing silenced a few weeks later). The Redskins sliced up the Eagles with 2 different not-Andrew-Luck QBs, so no difference there. So that leaves us with the Giants. Although the Eagles in fact won both games, there was a 250+ difference in PYA and -6 adjustment in sacks with basically the same personnel on the field, same schemes, only ~2 months later. Surely the Linc can't be credited with that much of a difference

So your means of proving that the Eagles get fatigued by the end of the season is focusing on a single game over a two year span.

I love this. Let's keep going! It's really fun hammering you into the ground round after round.

It appears your position is:
1. Statistics that back [you] up are irrelevant.

Huh? There really haven't been any statistics that don't back me up.

2. The secondary was so bad it couldn't get worse even if getting worse were possible.

I never said that. However, as a matter of fact, they laid stinkers throughout the entire season, not just at the end.

3. Getting worse due to fatigue isn't possible.

This is so sad. You're having to reduce my position to a straw man because you know you don't have the evidence to take on my actual argument. Child, I'll identify and call out each and every piece of sophistry you try and pull.

Of course players for every team in the league fatigue over the course of the season. The question is, do the Eagles, particularly their D, wear out at a more significant rate than other NFL teams? You're need is to support your original claim:

it's pretty obvious [] that the same reason his system works for him early in the season is why it works against him as the season drags on. The team, the defense especially, is worn out. He needs the team to last 5+ more games than he did in college, against increasingly better competition, who hasn't had to run at that speed all year like the Eagles have.

You have yet to provide any evidence A. that the Eagles defense is better at the beginning of the season than it is at the end of the season. The evidence from 2013 contradicts that statement (they performed better at the end of the season than they did at the beginning) as does the evidence from 2014, to a lesser degree (they were more or less the same at the beginning and end).

B. Then, even if it were the case that the Eagles defense dropped off in performance over the course of the season, you would next need to provide evidence that it was primarily the result of fatigue.

C. You would also need to provide an explanation for why highly successful teams who run similar up-tempo offenses (Patriots, Packers) are able to have success and even win the Super Bowl. Does something significant happen to body of certain players when they have those 3 to 5 extra snaps per game?

However, considering there is no evidence for the first point, this is all just exercise.

 

[Dak]

B. Then, even if it were the case that the Eagles defense dropped off in performance over the course of the season, you would next need to provide evidence that it was primarily the result of fatigue.

See here's where the problem is, and it's exactly where I said it was to begin with.

Statistics are clear on a macro level (Eagles ran more plays on defense than almost anyone else in the league, performance declined in terms of both yards and points allowed in December vs their season average) as well as a micro level (apples to apples: Eli Manning in early October vs late December). Cherry picking Cousins doesn't prove your point because I can cherry pick Luck. You can claim that the decrease in performance is too small to be significant, but we both know if performance improved you'd be putting that shit in big bold capital font. But you won't own up to any of that, so why should I expect you to accept that fatigue is the reason for the decline that "doesn't exist"? I obviously can't expect you to provide some other reason for something you are willing yourself to not see.

Edit: Just because you can't/won't do the macro math:

2014 Eagles OPPG: 25
Dec: 29(28.75)
and that 25 was even lower if you subtracted out Dec scores. A 4pt+ increase is extremely significant.

2014 OPYPG: 265 (264.9)Again, lower if you subtract out Dec PY.
Dec: 278.5 (includes playing the run heavy Seahawks)

Total yards was also higher at the end.

Editx2:

Here's an article about defensive improvement over 2013 - shortly before the wheels started falling off:

http://www.philadelphiaeagles.com/news/article-1/Wulfs-Den-The-Defensive-Improvement/aa2bcb6a-c73f-42d7-a246-ca2292fcc275

 

[rms]

Da Bills mo fuckaaaa

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

Jay Cutler being Jay Cutler

 

[Matt]

Packers started off okay, defense was shaky at times. Rodgers looked great as usual. Jay Cutler sucks.

 

[crimsonfloyd]

See here's where the problem is, and it's exactly where I said it was to begin with.

Statistics are clear on a macro level (Eagles ran more plays on defense than almost anyone else in the league, performance declined in terms of both yards and points allowed in December vs their season average) as well as a micro level (apples to apples: Eli Manning in early October vs late December). Cherry picking Cousins doesn't prove your point because I can cherry pick Luck. You can claim that the decrease in performance is too small to be significant, but we both know if performance improved you'd be putting that shit in big bold capital font. But you won't own up to any of that, so why should I expect you to accept that fatigue is the reason for the decline that "doesn't exist"? I obviously can't expect you to provide some other reason for something you are willing yourself to not see.

It's hilarious. You talk about cherry picking and you totally ignore 2013. You talk about cherry picking, but you totally ignore the poor start the Eagles D has got off to in September the last two years, when fatigue could not have been a factor. The simplest explanation is that the defense just hasn't been that talented (especially the secondary) and has been extremely inconsistent throughout the season. Seriously, you can dig as deep into this idiocy as you want, you just keep making yourself look like more and more of a dumb ass.

Edit: Just because you can't/won't do the macro math:

2014 Eagles OPPG: 25
Dec: 29(28.75)
and that 25 was even lower if you subtracted out Dec scores. A 4pt+ increase is extremely significant.

2014 OPYPG: 265 (264.9)Again, lower if you subtract out Dec PY.
Dec: 278.5 (includes playing the run heavy Seahawks)

Total yards was also higher at the end.

Again, I love the sophistry and unethical debate moves on your part. You are the one who needs to bring in the evidence to prove your assertion. Thanks for finally bringing in some relevant data.

Anyhow, for someone who is criticizing others for "cherry picking" it's outrageous that you ignored half of the data set by ignoring 2013. Are you that stupid or are you that unethical?

2013

Entire season: 23.9 ppg
December 24.4 ppg

Negligible difference

Entire season: 394 ypg
December: 336 ypg

Major drop in YPG

Why didn't his scheme exhaust the team in 2013?

Now let's compile the two seasons:

Two season average: 24.4 ppg
Two season December average: 26.3 ppg

Two season average: 385 ypg
December average: 310 ypg

So it looks like a mild drop off in points and a fairly sizable improvement with regards to yards. Certainly insufficient evidence to support your claim that Kelly's defenses regress in December, let alone your further claim that they regress due fatigue in December.

 

[Dak]

I didn't ignore 2013 for my "benefit", I figured you'd dismiss it as it was the first year in the new 3-4 coming from a 4-3, and performance should be better to some degree later once adjusted compared to just getting into it. But I should have known you'd grasp at any straw. Keep trying.

In other news: Pick Six Peyton is back to work!

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

What the fuck are you guys whining about now?

 

[Dak]

Ol cf is just confused.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

I wish my local team had come out on top, but it was a great defensive game between Baltimore and Denver. Hopefully Suggs' injury doesn't turn out to be serious.

 

[Nephilim96]

He's out for the year. torn achilles.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

That's his second achilles.

 

[crimsonfloyd]

I didn't ignore 2013 for my "benefit", I figured you'd dismiss it as it was the first year in the new 3-4 coming from a 4-3, and performance should be better to some degree later once adjusted compared to just getting into it. But I should have known you'd grasp at any straw. Keep trying.

In other news: Pick Six Peyton is back to work!

How would scheme change lead to the data not being relevant with regard to fatigue? I'll give you a hint: it wouldn't. That's just a red herring. And counting all relevant data is "grasping at straws"?

More sorry sophistry.

 

[Krow]

What the fuck are you guys whining about now?

They make this thread unenjoyable.

 

[Dak]

How would scheme change lead to the data not being relevant with regard to fatigue? I'll give you a hint: it wouldn't. That's just a red herring. And counting all relevant data is "grasping at straws"?

More sorry sophistry.

So a total scheme change doesn't affect production? Dude you are a fucking joke. I'm done arguing with someone so totally ignorant of football.

Edit: Jimmy, that sloppyness you spoke of is all over the league today (except for Mariotta et al). Good call.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

Cowboys

Romo is on point, the receiver chemistry is way off. There's still tons of off-season rust. I like what I've seen from McFadden so far. As usual with the Cowboys in division games, time to wait for the second half.

 

[Dak]

Cowboys

Romo is on point, the receiver chemistry is way off. There's still tons of off-season rust. I like what I've seen from McFadden so far. As usual with the Cowboys in division games, time to wait for the second half.

Yeah, I'm no fan of the "new" off season program, and all these drops are one of the reasons. Watched Steve Smith let a game winner bounce off his hands/facemask today.

Gregory man. Dude is quicker than Ware I think. Just a second late several times and Eli is getting that ball out quick. If you told me how sloppy the 'Boys opened up and that they were only down 7 at the half I would be relieved. Romo has been a little behind on some of the passes but thats no excuse for these drops and the fumbles obviously. Romo is calling everything out and getting no help.

McFadden looked better than Randle in his limited preseason showing also. Needs to get more touches. Itching to see Michael though.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

The defense has played solid so far. It looks like they're picking up where left of last year: they're not dominating the other team, but they're stopping them in the red zone. I can't wait to see how the defense looks after a few games, not to mention the additions they'll have on the fifth game.

Definitely, but I have a feeling he'll be sitting on the bench for a few weeks.

 

[Dak]

Hitchens is very solid, but so far he's not the game changer McClain is. Hardy is going to be icing on the cake I think for this line.

 

[crimsonfloyd]

So a total scheme change doesn't affect production? Dude you are a fucking joke. I'm done arguing with someone so totally ignorant of football.

I never said anything of the sort. It just has nothing to do with fatigue. Two seperate issues that you are trying to conflate to hide the fact that you were utterly owned in this debate. And of course, you ignored the data I presented, since it showed quite conclusively how stupid your original statement was. And yeah, of course you're "done" now. You've got nowhere left to hide and I won't let you get away with what we both know is bullshit.

Anyway, to the football field. The Cowboys are shooting themselves in the foot at the moment.