It's Derrick Brown, right?

[steven8989]

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Honestly, Bridgewater was in a much better situation. The Vikings had a much better overall team than we did.

The guy just hasn't proven to be very good so far in the NFL. It's hilarious how we think we got a bargain in Teddy. I think it's highly likely we were probably bidding against ourselves.

You should not be a mod, there is no way in hell your a Panthers fan.

[LinvilleGorge]

2 minutes ago, steven8989 said:

You should not be a mod, there is no way in hell your a Panthers fan.

As I've told you numerous times in the past, there's an ignore function. Feel free to use it.

All you ever do is make definitive statements with absolutely nothing to base them on or back them up. You've been wrong more often than the weatherman but just like the weatherman, you come back the next day just as confident.

[steven8989]

6 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

As I've told you numerous times in the past, there's an ignore function. Feel free to use it.

All you ever do is make definitive statements with absolutely nothing to base them on or back them up. You've been wrong more often than the weatherman but just like the weatherman, you come back the next day just as confident.

Yeah like I was wrong about Cam not playing for the Panthers this year and that we would not have a winning record this past year? How about we make a bet, Bridgewater throws for more than. 25 tds u have to give up being a mod, if not then I will deactivate my account? I will be waiting....

[LinvilleGorge]

4 minutes ago, steven8989 said:

Yeah like I was wrong about Cam not playing for the Panthers this year and that we would not have a winning record this past year? How about we make a bet, Bridgewater throws for more than. 25 tds u have to give up being a mod, if not then I will deactivate my account? I will be waiting....

Why would I make that deal? I would just have to spend weeks banning all the alts you'd come back with. I mean, you already have two lined up ready to go.

[steven8989]

3 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Why would I make that deal? I would just have to spend weeks banning all the alts you'd come back with. I mean, you already have two lined up ready to go.

Yeah that's what I thought u would say Cam nuthugger

[rippadonn]

1 hour ago, steven8989 said:

You should not be a mod, there is no way in hell your a Panthers fan.

He's right though. Not everybody is content with Teddy B. They are Panther fans too. We want the best for our team at QB people being disappointed going from Cam to Teddy B. should be expected. We were made to believe Cam was being released due to injury (when that obviously wasn't the issue) and then we get the guy who had the most horrific injury I've seen in NFL TV.

I'm happy about the future especially if they invest in a potential franchise QB. That would be fun to watch, more so than Sean Payton's second/third string rejects.

 

[Verge]

9 hours ago, steven8989 said:

We don't need corner depth lol, we need a lockdown starter day 1. We have no one that can do that now, and Donte looks like he isn't even a starter. 

And we just live with giving up 5.0 yards a carry and no interior pressure? Corners are straight up useless without pressure, which we don't have at the moment. 

8 hours ago, theinstrumental said:

No I get what you're saying, but there's at ten-rep difference between them on the bench press and you can't explain that away by saying it wasn't at the combine. Brown just didn't put up elite testing numbers. 

Look, we're going round and round on this like you think I said that Brown's not a good prospect. I don't think that--he has some great film and I think he's going to be good at what he does. But there were two reps in the Bama game that show what I'm talking about. In the first, Brown shows a nice spin move. In the second, great change of direction and rip. He gets to the quarterback both times. And both times, the ball comes out and Alabama scores a touchdown. Two really beautiful reps from Brown, two scores for the other team. This was the Iron Bowl. Alabama and Auburn. Multiple defensive first round picks on both teams. Final score: 48-45. This "passing stuff" isn't going away. It's how football works now, and you don't get a lot of cracks at top ten picks. A big gap-hogging defensive tackle's not worth one of them right now.
 

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of next level transition, and play strength. I can 100% tell you there is not one NFL team that has issues with Derick Brown's combine numbers, and understands he is one of the strongest human beings on this planet. NFL offenses aren't going to put up those kinds of numbers against great defenses every week in the NFL, receivers just don't get that level of separation consistently in the NFL, and the most important aspect of containing an explosive offense in the NFL is interior pressure. If you can't stop the run or create interior pressure, you might as well pack it up unless Patrick Mahomes is your QB. 

[theinstrumental]

12 hours ago, Verge said:

Corners are straight up useless without pressure, which we don't have at the moment. 

I think this is the fundamental difference that we keep getting to in this thread. Coverage is at least as important as pass rush. It's much easier now than ever to scheme away pass rush, so I'd prefer a player who contributes to coverage or to the offense at #7--Simmons or one of the offensive tackles, since Okudah's not likely to be there. After all, you could easily say the inverse, that pass rush is useless without coverage, and we don't have that either. More here: https://www.pff.com/news/pro-pff-data-study-coverage-vs-pass-rush

[45catfan]

18 minutes ago, theinstrumental said:

I think this is the fundamental difference that we keep getting to in this thread. Coverage is at least as important as pass rush. It's much easier now than ever to scheme away pass rush, so I'd prefer a player who contributes to coverage or to the offense at #7--Simmons or one of the offensive tackles, since Okudah's not likely to be there. After all, you could easily say the inverse, that pass rush is useless without coverage, and we don't have that either. More here: https://www.pff.com/news/pro-pff-data-study-coverage-vs-pass-rush

Yeah, that 'study' didn't change my mind at all.  Their criteria for 'successfully' defending a pass was HIGHLY subjective.  Literally, it didn't account for just a simple bad pass by the QB.  Right there, the whole thing is bogus.  An incomplete pass, so as long as WR was covered was deemed 'defended'.  We all know that NFL QBs are perfect and there is no such thing as an inaccurate throw, with coverage or not.

So a QB throwing the ball a the feet of a WR because he's highly under duress (simply to get rid of it) is win for the CB who may not even have that tight of coverage?  I can come up with all sorts of scenarios where the QB obviously delivers a bad pass, BUT as long as there was some sort of coverage on the intended target, that goes as a win for the secondary.

 

[theinstrumental]

4 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Yeah, that 'study' didn't change my mind at all.  Their criteria for 'successfully' defending a pass was HIGHLY subjective.  Literally, it didn't account for just a simple bad pass by the QB.  Right there, the whole thing is bogus.  An incomplete pass, so as long as WR was covered was deemed 'defended'.  We all know that NFL QBs are perfect and there is no such thing as an inaccurate throw, with coverage or not.

So a QB throwing the ball a the feet of a WR because he's highly under duress (simply to get rid of it) is win for the CB who may not even have that tight of coverage?  I can come up with all sorts of scenarios where the QB obviously delivers a bad pass, BUT as long as there was some sort of coverage on the intended target, that goes as a win for the secondary.

 

Where do you see that? They're correlating their coverage grades to defensive success. Their grades are outcome-independent: "For coverage men, a positive grade is earned by forcing an incompletion (either by intercepting or knocking the ball away or via forcing an overthrow or a throw out of bounds by limiting receiver separation), while negative grades are earned by being beat in coverage (whether or not the ball is caught)."

[45catfan]

3 minutes ago, theinstrumental said:

Where do you see that? They're correlating their coverage grades to defensive success. Their grades are outcome-independent: "For coverage men, a positive grade is earned by forcing an incompletion (either by intercepting or knocking the ball away or via forcing an overthrow or a throw out of bounds by limiting receiver separation), while negative grades are earned by being beat in coverage (whether or not the ball is caught)."

Highly subjective. The part I underlined is easy to define, INTor a ball knock down.  The negative is also very easy to grade, the ball is caught...period.

Forcing an incompletion?  Depending how it is looked upon, is an overthrow a bad pass or good coverage? It could be either and potentially both.  Again, too subjective to be taken as a serious study.

A scientific study with such flimsy statistical criteria would never see the light of day.

[tiger7_88]

1 hour ago, 45catfan said:

A scientific study with such flimsy statistical criteria would never see the light of day.

Unfortunately you are incorrect here.  There are plenty of poor, flimsy “scientific” “studies” that “see the light of day” these days.

Some of them get funding.

Hell, some of them get PUBLISHED (as long as they check the right boxes).

[PanicPete]

20 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Kyle Allen last season:

3322 passing yards. 62% completion rate. 17 TDs, 16 INTs. 6.8 yards per attempt.

Bridgewater's Pro Bowl season:

3231 passing yards. 65% completion rate. 14 TDs, 9 INTs. 6.9 yards per attempt.

Bridgewater takes better care of the football, other than that they're basically the same guy.

Yeah if you take his fumble issues and half his ints away....Kyle would still be our starter lol. Doesn't sound bad to me

[45catfan]

22 minutes ago, tiger7_88 said:

Unfortunately you are incorrect here.  There are plenty of poor, flimsy “scientific” “studies” that “see the light of day” these days.

Some of them get funding.

Hell, some of them get PUBLISHED (as long as they check the right boxes).

If able, I try to get the criteria first before I take too much stock in a study.  IF the methodology is solid, then I will tend to put credence into the findings.  However, too many people see a 'statistical study' and think it is has to be fact.  Years ago I took a couple statistics courses in college and I still remember the professor saying "garbage in, garbage out".  In other words if you have flawed methodology/criteria for collecting your data, the resulting data will be bad.  

I see your point though, in today's political climate people use bad data to try to prove a point...many times knowing the results are flawed.  I was thinking along the lines of historical, purely scientific, research.