291 posts
  • 18 / 30
  • 1
  • 18
  • 30
 by /zn/
7 years 6 months ago
 Total posts:   6947  
 Joined:  Jun 28 2015
United States of America   Maine
Hall of Fame

dieterbrock wrote:Perfect example of how flawed this "stat" is.
That comeback to which you speak? It wouldnt count as a 4th quarter comeback because they merely tied the game in the 4th q and won in OT
.


That counts as a comeback win. Sorry but it does. In fact if you look at the one place that keeps tabs on comebacks, yes they do count 4th quarter games where you comeback to tie and then win in OT as comebacks. (Don't worry about doing the dismissive flame thing while actually being dead in the wrong...it's surprisingly common. 8-) ).

Example, one of my favorite games, 10/10/04:

Image

 by /zn/
7 years 6 months ago
 Total posts:   6947  
 Joined:  Jun 28 2015
United States of America   Maine
Hall of Fame

ramsman34 wrote:
Which, to me, is all that matters. I don't care how we win as long as we do. And frankly, blowing teams out is a lot more fun than nail biters when watching OUR team. It's fun to watch other tight, last-minute games that don't involve the Rams.


So you didn't like Warner to Proehl v. Tampa in 99?
Or Ferragamo to Waddy v. Dallas in 79?

Those are landmark games. All you have to do is say "the catch" or "Vince to Waddy" and long term fans know exactly what you mean. Like everyone else I like all Rams wins. But since, like it or not, any team is going to end up in close games, it's good when the Rams win those too.

...

 by aeneas1
7 years 6 months ago
 Total posts:   16894  
 Joined:  Sep 13 2015
United States of America   Norcal
Hall of Fame

snackdaddy wrote:This whole debate started with the question of whether or not Goff is ready for a big game. I think he already proved that before the game. And the team showed its not all about the quarterback. They're all ready for a big game.

the original post questioned goff's big game readiness while pointing to his 4th quarter numbers as reason for concern, so the thread naturally evolved into a debate over a qb's "crunch time" prowess which some, incorrectly imo, believe can be measured using qb 4qc stats.

if rams fans are waiting for goff to become a qb who can consistently rally the rams to wins when trailing late in a game, they might as well wait until the end of time, no qb can do it, win consistently when trailing late, collectively hof qbs have about a .250 w/l batting average when trailing after 3 quarters.

the good news? hof qbs have a great track record of heading into the 4th quarter ahead, which puts their team in a position to win, something goff has done more often than not throughout the 2017 season, including "big games".

 by /zn/
7 years 6 months ago
 Total posts:   6947  
 Joined:  Jun 28 2015
United States of America   Maine
Hall of Fame

aeneas1 wrote:the original post questioned goff's big game readiness while pointing to his 4th quarter numbers as reason for concern, so the thread naturally evolved into a debate over a qb's "crunch time" prowess which some, incorrectly imo, believe can be measured using qb 4qc stats.

if rams fans are waiting for goff to become a qb who can consistently rally the rams to wins when trailing late in a game, they might as well wait until the end of time, no qb can do it, win consistently when trailing late, collectively hof qbs have about a .250 w/l batting average when trailing after 3 quarters.

the good news? hof qbs have a great track record of heading into the 4th quarter ahead, which puts their team in a position to win, something goff has done more often than not throughout the 2017 season, including "big games".


No one "incorrectly believes" what you say there. The part I bold. What's incorrect there is your own statement. You can keep repeating your own misperceptions as strawmen to argue with but it's easy enough to point it out when you do.

As for the red herring about having leads, only 2 teams are undefeated. All teams lose games, and all teams are in close games. There is value in having a qb who can perform effectively under those conditions, which include time constraints you don't see in the previous 3 1/2 quarters. It is possible to determine some qbs are not as good under those conditions (like Rodgers) and that some are (like Montana). None of that is controversial. (And no, no current stat tells you that...no one routinely publishes percentages of wins in those conditions. Also no one said that the NUMBER of such wins determines being good or bad at it. We just know, and in fact everyone knows, that Rodgers is not as good at that, Montana was.)

The whole thing about good teams dominating early is also beside the point. Good teams WILL BE in close games. No matter who they are. That's just an obvious given. Unless you can prove they're NOT, which is ridiculous on the face of it.

If your team is good under those conditions you win more games. Usually against better opposition, in fact, so there are some added benefits scattered in there (like post-season tie breakers).

Opposing any of this is a fool's errand. You're fighting against things no one said, missing what they do say, and arguing against something there's no point in arguing against.

All the while agreeing with the main point, which is that Goff will mature into this.

...

 by aeneas1
7 years 6 months ago
 Total posts:   16894  
 Joined:  Sep 13 2015
United States of America   Norcal
Hall of Fame

/zn/ wrote:You can keep repeating your own misperceptions as strawmen to argue with but it's easy enough to point it out when you do.

/zn/ wrote:So you didn't like Warner to Proehl v. Tampa in 99?
Or Ferragamo to Waddy v. Dallas in 79?

ha ha, absolutely priceless. :D
please, don't ever change! :D

 by /zn/
7 years 6 months ago
 Total posts:   6947  
 Joined:  Jun 28 2015
United States of America   Maine
Hall of Fame

aeneas1 wrote:ha ha, absolutely priceless. :D
please, don't ever change! :D


Sorry, that one didn't even make sense. 8-)

I generally assume you use flame tactics when disagreed with out of false bravado. Which isn't the same as having an actual argument.

Fact is you spent all this energy here arguing against something no one said.

So, yes, please DO change. 8-)

But. Enough. I'm starting to cross some lines myself.

...

 by PARAM
7 years 6 months ago
 Total posts:   13225  
 Joined:  Jul 15 2015
Barbados   Just far enough North of Philadelphia
Hall of Fame

Roughly 45 to 52% of all games (every year) are decided by 7 points or less (with rare annual exceptions like 2014/38.3%). And 20 to 25% of all games (every year) are decided by 3 points or less. So it's inevitable there will be QBs who engineer drives to win games. And like everything else offense-related, they will get the lion's share of the credit for that. What the O line didn't "buck it up" in crunch time? A receiver didn't make a great play? A DB didn't fall down? Good TEAMS are going to win more close games than they'll lose. It's what makes them "good teams".

But more so than the W/L record Quarterbacks are credited with or saddled by, the 4QC ledger is extremely ridiculous. When a guy can start a possession in the 3rd quarter, drive his team to FG range so the PK kicks one with 9 and a half minutes left in the game to tie it. Then somebody on his defense makes a play and gets a safety and the QB is credited with a 4QC!!! The really ridiculous thing about this particular example is besides all that happening, the QB threw a pick near midfield with the 2 point lead but his defense pulled him out of the fire AGAIN by stopping the opponent. And that isn't the only example of flawed qualifications. There are many others.

So we can look at the numbers and say "Brady is terrific late in games under pressure", which is true but it's more accurate to say "the Patriots TEAM is terrific late in games under pressure" AND they still lose their fair share of them!!

Peyton Manning is the all time leader with 45*....I haven't delved into checking his yet.... but is that really surprising when he played for a team who was consistently terrible on defense? Of course there are going to be more opportunities for comebacks and it says as much for Tom Moore's scheme as it does about Peyton Manning's ability under pressure.

Strawmen and Red Herring? Naa. Just honest reality.

 by aeneas1
7 years 6 months ago
 Total posts:   16894  
 Joined:  Sep 13 2015
United States of America   Norcal
Hall of Fame

PARAM wrote:Strawmen and Red Herring? Naa. Just honest reality.

goff's rankings:
td% - 5th
int% - 6th
yards per attempt - 5th
qb rating - 7th

mariota's rankings:
td% - 28th
int% - 28th
yards per attempt - 17th
qb rating - 27th

but wait, hold the presses, mariota has been credited with three 4qc through week 15, goff none, which of course means mariota is the guy you want to go into battle with, the guy you want when the game's on the line, the "clutch" guy, ha ha, good friggin' grief.

 by /zn/
7 years 6 months ago
 Total posts:   6947  
 Joined:  Jun 28 2015
United States of America   Maine
Hall of Fame

aeneas1 wrote:
but wait, hold the presses, mariota has been credited with three 4qc through week 15, goff none, which of course means mariota is the guy you want to go into battle with, the guy you want when the game's on the line, the "clutch" guy, ha ha, good friggin' grief.


We both keep saying that as Goff develops he will win in situations like that. So we both see it that way.

And (again), no one ever said that numbers of C.B. wins determine a qb;s value. Remember, that was an imaginary thing you got from misreading. (Something apparently you don't intend to fix.)

Besides strawmen, and in fact imaginary strawmen at that---or more than that, lots of imaginary strawmen on parade---who or what are you fighting with?

Remember, I asked besides STRAWMEN what are you fighting with.

As long as you keep doing it I will just keep pointing it out. 8-)


..

....

 by ramsman34
7 years 6 months ago
 Total posts:   10040  
 Joined:  Apr 16 2015
United States of America   Back in LA baby!
Moderator

/zn/ wrote:So you didn't like Warner to Proehl v. Tampa in 99?
Or Ferragamo to Waddy v. Dallas in 79?

Those are landmark games. All you have to do is say "the catch" or "Vince to Waddy" and long term fans know exactly what you mean. Like everyone else I like all Rams wins. But since, like it or not, any team is going to end up in close games, it's good when the Rams win those too.

...


Kind of a dumb question. The games, especially the '99 one was nerve wracking as all hell. LOVED the outcome. Landmarks games are fine. I want landmark seasons IE Championships. however we get them doesn't matter but blowing teams out is easier on the nerves, lol.

  • 18 / 30
  • 1
  • 18
  • 30
291 posts Jul 15 2025