What's with the Thigpen fixation?

[Sam Hall]

There needs to be scientific research about this. Pro Football Outsiders and the scorers can't be trusted. I can believe the two QBs get hit an equal amount, but I doubt it's that lopsided. I dispute the whole thing because of the research limitations.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Sam Hall

There needs to be scientific research about this. Pro Football Outsiders and the scorers can't be trusted. I can believe the two QBs get hit an equal amount, but I doubt it's that lopsided. I dispute the whole thing because of the research limitations.

Of course you do, because it's much easier to dispute all this evidence instead of just saying, "I WAS WRONG."

Then again, I'd expect nothing less from you.

[Sam Hall]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Of course you do, because it's much easier to dispute all this evidence instead of just saying, "I WAS WRONG."

Then again, I'd expect nothing less from you.

That kind of research can't be trusted. I know because research is the heart of what I'm doing at graduate school. I would never cite Pro Football Outsiders in a paper. It's OK on a message board, but not OK when conducting actual research.

That would take an expensive study where researchers attend games and count the number of times QBs get hit.

[Sam Hall]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Of course you do, because it's much easier to dispute all this evidence instead of just saying, "I WAS WRONG."

Then again, I'd expect nothing less from you.

I could easily say the same thing about you.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Sam Hall

I could easily say the same thing about you.

I'm not the one making saying, "Well, I'm right because I think I'm right."

My position is backed up by statistics and evidence.

[Sam Hall]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I'm not the one making saying, "Well, I'm right because I think I'm right."

My position is backed up by statistics and evidence.

You think you're right because of what a Web site says. I know this is beyond message board logic, but show me a study published in an academic journal.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Sam Hall

You think you're right because of what a Web site says. I know this is beyond message board logic, but show me a study published in an academic journal.

I guess you don't trust NFL.com either.

You know, like these:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Then stick to verifiable stats. Roethlisberger got sacked 46 times in 469 pass attempts and Brees got sacked 13 times in 635. That's 1 sack every 10 drop-backs versus 1 sack every 49. That's nearly 3 sacks per game versus less than 1.

(How's that for lopsided...)

I think it would be very difficult to argue that Roethlisberger wasn't getting hit a lot more on a game-by game basis based on that. Project Roethlisberger's numbers out to the same number of attempts as Brees and he'd have been sacked over 62 times. Versus 13.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by Sam Hall

You think you're right because of what a Web site says. I know this is beyond message board logic, but show me a study published in an academic journal.

All those NFL statistical studies in academic journals?

It's going to be in the upcoming issue of PMLA, rest easy.

Couple research skills with a touch of common sense.

[orange]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I'm not the one making saying, "Well, I'm right because I think I'm right."

My position is backed up by statistics and evidence.

What exact is your position? That Brees get's hit less than Rothlisberger? Let's say we grant that - actually MUCH less.

Now do a statistical breakdown on "Brees would be crushed behind Pittsburg's line," which is what started this whole "debate." You can use injuries/passing attempt, injuries/season, games missed/sack, or any other statistic you can come up with.

Originally Posted by pestilenceaf23

Can Bree's take a hit? Because that's what Big Ben repeatedly does....and still gets back up.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

And apparently, you don't listen outside of the draft forum either:

Brees would absolutely be destroyed behind the Pittsburgh line, throwing to the Pittsburgh receivers.

If Ben was sacked 46 times, how many times do you think Brees would have been sacked? 60? What do you think his completion percentage would have been with defenders in his face one each and every play?

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by orange

What exact is your position? That Brees get's hit less than Rothlisberger? Let's say we grant that - actually MUCH less.

Now do a statistical breakdown on "Brees would be crushed behind Pittsburg's line," which is what started this whole "debate." You can use injuries/passing attempt, injuries/season, games missed/sack, or any other statistic you can come up with.

What started this whole debate changed when Sam said this:

Originally Posted by Sam Hall

Here's more: Brees had almost 1,300 pass attempts during the past two seasons. It's safe to say he took plenty of shots.

Go back and look: that is where I entered the debate.

[orange]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Brees would absolutely be destroyed behind the Pittsburgh line, throwing to the Pittsburgh receivers.

If Ben was sacked 46 times, how many times do you think Brees would have been sacked? 60? What do you think his completion percentage would have been with defenders in his face one each and every play?

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

What started this whole debate changed when Sam said this:



Go back and look: that is where I entered the debate.

Will you agree then that there is NO justification whatsoever for DaneMcCloud's claim?


Statistical evidence > opinion.

Every day of the week.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Sam Hall

There needs to be scientific research about this. Pro Football Outsiders and the scorers can't be trusted. I can believe the two QBs get hit an equal amount, but I doubt it's that lopsided. I dispute the whole thing because of the research limitations.

What a staggering amount of intellectual dishonesty.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

What a staggering amount of intellectual dishonesty.

Amazing, ain't it?

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by Sam Hall

There needs to be scientific research about this. Pro Football Outsiders and the scorers can't be trusted. I can believe the two QBs get hit an equal amount, but I doubt it's that lopsided. I dispute the whole thing because of the research limitations.

Then stick to verifiable stats. Roethlisberger got sacked 46 times in 469 pass attempts and Brees got sacked 13 times in 635. That's 1 sack every 10 drop-backs versus 1 sack every 49. That's nearly 3 sacks per game versus less than 1.

(How's that for lopsided...)

I think it would be very difficult to argue that Roethlisberger wasn't getting hit a lot more on a game-by game basis based on that. Project Roethlisberger's numbers out to the same number of attempts as Brees and he'd have been sacked over 62 times. Versus 13.

Again, this isn't some kind of argument that Brees is somehow less of a QB because he was hit less. It's just...numbers.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Then stick to verifiable stats. Roethlisberger got sacked 46 times in 469 pass attempts and Brees got sacked 13 times in 635. That's 1 sack every 10 drop-backs versus 1 sack every 49. That's nearly 3 sacks per game versus less than 1.

(How's that for lopsided...)

I think it would be very difficult to argue that Roethlisberger wasn't getting hit a lot more on a game-by game basis based on that. Project Roethlisberger's numbers out to the same number of attempts as Brees and he'd have been sacked over 62 times. Versus 13.

Again, this isn't some kind of argument that Brees is somehow less of a QB because he was hit less. It's just...numbers.

Exactly.

Hell, I even took hits COMPLETELY out of the equation for BR, since we didn't have anything listed, and the evidence STILL shows that he's getting hit more.

Here's Sam working as a defense attorney for an alleged murderer:

Judge: Mr. Hall, your opening argument, please?

Hall: Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, it is my opinion that my client did not murder those people. That is all.