There are 294 users in the forums
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by Furlow:
So if the defense is on the field less, and the opposing offense has less opportunities to score - you don't think that translates to less points?
I can't anymore.
So 1:19 is gonna make what exact point difference?
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by TreyDeyEeyDey:
Thank you. As I said shallow... It's one of many things Jimmy does to help not his entire repertoire lol. At some point it's just trolling.
Nah shallow is blaming Jimmy solely....if there isn't team improvement as if it's all on him
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by Furlow:
1. No one has ever said that TOP is only determined by how good the offense is. OF COURSE the defense has to also be good.
2. It is completely disingenuous to stop at the top 2 teams to make your point about TOP not being a good indicator of team and/or offensive success. But we know why you did that.
Not disingenuous at all because I didn't make the assertion that a QB alone coming to an offense and improving the TOP will single handedly improve the defense and if that doesn't happen is at fault. I'm just showing the correlation works better in the opposite direction if anything.
.
Originally posted by random49er:
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by Furlow:
So if the defense is on the field less, and the opposing offense has less opportunities to score - you don't think that translates to less points?
I can't anymore.
So 1:19 is gonna make what exact point difference?
or yardage difference?
would be kind of cool for him to just say "ok,...maybe this never made much sense to begin with?" But I digress...
Originally posted by Furlow:
It is very disingenuous to use only 2 examples to prove your point, and now you're doubling down and calling it a "correlation." I mean really.
And no one made that assertion. Your constant strawman arguments are distracting and unnecessary.
Originally posted by TreyDeyEeyDey:
So what you and have random have been doing for years. Yuuup. What point where you trying to make here? You blame everything on Jimmy. The hypocrisy of you guys knows no bounds. I have always maintained winning is on a QB. You guys flip flip every other day. One day QBs don't win games the next you blame Jimmy for losing games lol amd have 1000's of post blaming Jimmy for everything. Literally everything...
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by TreyDeyEeyDey:
So what you and have random have been doing for years. Yuuup. What point where you trying to make here? You blame everything on Jimmy. The hypocrisy of you guys knows no bounds. I have always maintained winning is on a QB. You guys flip flip every other day. One day QBs don't win games the next you blame Jimmy for losing games lol amd have 1000's of post blaming Jimmy for everything. Literally everything...
Where have I done that? Can ya show me a quote?
I've never blamed a single player for a loss ever. It's always a blame pie. Always.
Originally posted by richterkbelmont:Have been away from this forum for ages.
Jimmy is not on the team anymore.
And his topic is still at the top of the forum?
lmao people just move on. Let the Raiders enjoy the 10 healthy games he will give them, and then it'll be the Brian Hoyer fiesta in Las Vegas.
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Handcuffing? No way.
Playing the style of offense he's most comfortable in and familiar with? No way.
That's what makes this little experiment so intriguing.
I don't expect Jimmys numbers to go up becauses hes more comfortable with Josh offense. Theyll go up out of necessity to keep Raiders in games.
Originally posted by Furlow:
You literally just blamed the Super Bowl loss on Jimmy in the Trey thread lol. Give it a rest, dude.
Originally posted by NCommand:
I would certainly expect an uptick in passing stats. They were 13th last year in attempts and we were 27th. With Jimmy in the spread back with McDaniels, I'd expect the short game to replace the running game to a larger extent too.
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by NCommand:
I would certainly expect an uptick in passing stats. They were 13th last year in attempts and we were 27th. With Jimmy in the spread back with McDaniels, I'd expect the short game to replace the running game to a larger extent too.
It's possible. I just can't see that defense giving them a legit shot to be in games against the better teams. I expect Jimmys turnovers to go up as well out of HAVING to keep them in games.
Originally posted by Strwy2Hevn:
Originally posted by richterkbelmont:
Have been away from this forum for ages.
Jimmy is not on the team anymore.
And his topic is still at the top of the forum?
lmao people just move on. Let the Raiders enjoy the 10 healthy games he will give them, and then it'll be the Brian Hoyer fiesta in Las Vegas.
10? Oh you must mean 3 years combined..
Originally posted by NCommand:
That could very well happen too. If they remain 13th, no matter the reason, it's very possible to see an uptick in all passing categories including the negative ones.