Please don’t screw this up

[scratched]

I’m more worried about who our next coach is, then where we are drafting. 

[Tbe]

10 minutes ago, onmyown said:

Texans as well.

It’s as if the tanking teams are actually setting themselves up.

Meanwhile we’ve been trading away picks and denying accumulating them lol

We are doomed until Tepper gets out of his own way.

well the Texans are going to get #1 overall. They don’t need to trade.

[CPantherKing]

4 hours ago, Tbe said:

Brady really skews those number. Look at SB QBs the past 10 years or so.

How many 1st rounders do you see? Now take out Brady? How many do you see relative to other rounds?

http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/superbowl_quarterbacks/

Then you should take out the Mannings too because they are outliers for #1 overall picks.

What does it look like if you take out the Mannings and Brady? Get rid of both sides of the skew.

Not looking good for 1st round picks without the Mannings - NFL royalty.

SB winners: Top 10 - Mahomes (2 years, rookie contract); Stafford (12 years, 3 contracts, not for drafted team). mid to late 1st - Joe Flacco (5 years, rookie contract). Others: Foles (5 years), Wilson (2 years)

SB Losers: Top 10 - Newton, Burrow, Goff, Ryan. Others - Kaepernick, Jimmy G, 

For additional QBs starting their careers in the past 25 seasons. Winners. Warner, Roethlisberger, Brees, Rodgers. Losers: Delhomme, McNabb, Hasselbeck, Grossman.

So, when you remove Brady and the Mannings because apparently we need to get rid of outliers and people whine about Brady skewing the numbers in favor of non-1st rounders, the numbers are.... EVEN.

If you want to increase your chance of losing the SB, then draft a QB in the top 10 picks. If you want to have the same chances of getting to the SB or winning the SB, then don't waste all that draft capital on a 1st round QB. Spend it on your defense or a freakish receiver with great hands.

[WUnderhill]

1 hour ago, panthers55 said:

I wonder how many times you will repeat that between now and the draft. 

I guess depends how many times it gets rubbed in our faces? I looked at your profile bc I thought you must be salty from some conversation we had in the trade deadline thread or something, but I still have no idea who tf you are. If my posts bother this much, feel free to ignore me, I’ll find a way to manage. But with your 26k posts to my 1.6k I’ve got pretty good idea on who probably makes more redundant posts around here.

[Tbe]

23 minutes ago, CPantherKing said:

Then you should take out the Mannings too because they are outliers for #1 overall picks.

What does it look like if you take out the Mannings and Brady? Get rid of both sides of the skew.

Not looking good for 1st round picks without the Mannings - NFL royalty.

SB winners: Top 10 - Mahomes (2 years, rookie contract); Stafford (12 years, 3 contracts, not for drafted team). mid to late 1st - Joe Flacco (5 years, rookie contract). Others: Foles (5 years), Wilson (2 years)

SB Losers: Top 10 - Newton, Burrow, Goff, Ryan. Others - Kaepernick, Jimmy G, 

For additional QBs starting their careers in the past 25 seasons. Winners. Warner, Roethlisberger, Brees, Rodgers. Losers: Delhomme, McNabb, Hasselbeck, Grossman.

So, when you remove Brady and the Mannings because apparently we need to get rid of outliers and people whine about Brady skewing the numbers in favor of non-1st rounders, the numbers are.... EVEN.

If you want to increase your chance of losing the SB, then draft a QB in the top 10 picks. If you want to have the same chances of getting to the SB or winning the SB, then don't waste all that draft capital on a 1st round QB. Spend it on your defense or a freakish receiver with great hands.

Ok, let’s keep Brady and the Manning’s in.

In the past 12 years 17 different QBs have played in the SB

11 were first rounders.

The non 1st rounders were Brady, Brees, Foles, Wilson, Kapernic, Garapollo.

Ive said this a million times. There is no magic formula. It’s all luck to some extent. Many ways to win. BUT, in a QB driven league where defenses are being neutered, If you need a QB your odds are best in the 1st round.

[panthers55]

10 minutes ago, WUnderhill said:

I guess depends how many times it gets rubbed in our faces? I looked at your profile bc I thought you must be salty from some conversation we had in the trade deadline thread or something, but I still have no idea who tf you are. If my posts bother this much, feel free to ignore me, I’ll find a way to manage. But with your 26k posts to my 1.6k I’ve got pretty good idea on who probably makes more redundant posts around here.

I don't respect tank mentality and have little tolerance for it from the same half dozen poster ad nauseum. How many posts did you make saying we were stupid for not making the trade. I was just asking a question I am sure I am not the only one who wondered that. Didn't realize you were going to be triggered. And it is equal opportunity. I have lots of discussions with tankers. You aren't alone. 

Edited November 17, 2022 by panthers55

[WUnderhill]

20 minutes ago, CPantherKing said:

Then you should take out the Mannings too because they are outliers for #1 overall picks.

What does it look like if you take out the Mannings and Brady? Get rid of both sides of the skew.

Not looking good for 1st round picks without the Mannings - NFL royalty.

SB winners: Top 10 - Mahomes (2 years, rookie contract); Stafford (12 years, 3 contracts, not for drafted team). mid to late 1st - Joe Flacco (5 years, rookie contract). Others: Foles (5 years), Wilson (2 years)

SB Losers: Top 10 - Newton, Burrow, Goff, Ryan. Others - Kaepernick, Jimmy G, 

For additional QBs starting their careers in the past 25 seasons. Winners. Warner, Roethlisberger, Brees, Rodgers. Losers: Delhomme, McNabb, Hasselbeck, Grossman.

So, when you remove Brady and the Mannings because apparently we need to get rid of outliers and people whine about Brady skewing the numbers in favor of non-1st rounders, the numbers are.... EVEN.

If you want to increase your chance of losing the SB, then draft a QB in the top 10 picks. If you want to have the same chances of getting to the SB or winning the SB, then don't waste all that draft capital on a 1st round QB. Spend it on your defense or a freakish receiver with great hands.

You don’t really know how to look at stats. The success rate is higher for QBs selected in t10. Let’s make up some imaginary numbers so you can understand.

Lets say out of 10 Super Bowls, 5 winning QBs were selected in t10 and 5 came from everywhere else.

Additionally, let’s say of those 10 years there were a total of 20 QBs drafted in the t10. That’s 5/20, or 1/4 of the t10 QBs got a super bowl. Now let’s say there were 100 other QBs that came into the league from everywhere else: other rounds of the draft, undrafted, NFL Europe, Arena Football, Canada, whatever. That’s 5/100, or 1/20.

Now do you like a 1 in 4 chance for a super bowl better or 1 in 20?

[WUnderhill]

3 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

I don't respect tank mentality and have little tolerance for it from the same half dozen poster ad nauseum. How many posts did you make saying we were stupid for not making the trade. I was just asking a question I am sure I am not the only one who wondered that. Didn't realize you were going to be triggered. And it is equal opportunity. I have lots of discussions with tankers. You aren't alone. 

Lol I’m triggered, ok dude.

[Mr. Scot]

We still have a shot at the playoffs...

 

[hepcat]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

We still have a shot at the playoffs...

 

That % would be like 25% if they’d managed to beat the Falcons the first time 

[Jackie Lee]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

We still have a shot at the playoffs...

 

Well our division should be complete trash for a while. Honorable mentions to the Rams and Broncos for going all in lol. I barely count the Rams SB win because people in LA don't give a rats ass 

[BrisbanePanther]

How often to 5 and 6-win teams eventually win the Super Bowl? And how long do they take? Seems like worst-to-first happens a lot more often. 5- and 6-win teams seem to think that they're *this* close, and then they spend stupidly on free agents and make weird trades that cost them later...only to still win 5 or 6 games...maybe 7 or 8. 

[Jackie Lee]

9 minutes ago, BrisbanePanther said:

How often to 5 and 6-win teams eventually win the Super Bowl? And how long do they take? Seems like worst-to-first happens a lot more often. 5- and 6-win teams seem to think that they're *this* close, and then they spend stupidly on free agents and make weird trades that cost them later...only to still win 5 or 6 games...maybe 7 or 8. 

On average, Super Bowl champions win 12.7 games the year they win the Super Bowl (with non-16 game seasons pro-rated to 16 games), 10.9 games the year before, 9.7 the year before that, 9.5 three years before, and 9.2 four years before.   Bengals are probably the only truly bad team to make the Super Bowl in recent memory, aside from our SB appearance which had us 7-8-1 the year before and 12-4 the year before that. Rams and 49ers were kind of middling before their performances but not "tankers"

[trueblade]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

We still have a shot at the playoffs...