Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Time of possession won't matter « previous next »
Page: 1 2

GameTime

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 19278
Online
#15 : December 03, 2012, 09:05:33 AM

im not sure there's a simple answer.  we seemed to limit the broncos in the first half with some time ensuing drives.  we scored more in the 2nd half, but still lost the point battle.  its a multitude of factors.

the 3rd qtr was miserable with 3 and outs, a pick 6 and a very short field for manning.

\"Lets put the O back in Country\"

Biggs3535

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 31580
Online
#16 : December 03, 2012, 09:13:42 AM

I think the point was....score, score and score some more. No matter how long the drives took.   In other words, score touchdowns, don't worry about 7 minute drives.

You put this in crayons and construction paper, please?


Dolorous Jason

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 17053
Online
#17 : December 03, 2012, 04:12:59 PM

im not sure there's a simple answer.  we seemed to limit the broncos in the first half with some time ensuing drives.  we scored more in the 2nd half, but still lost the point battle.  its a multitude of factors.

the 3rd qtr was miserable with 3 and outs, a pick 6 and a very short field for manning.

True , but I can garantee you we aren't going to win many shoot-outs against hall-of-fame Quarterbacks with our defense. Slowing the game down and limiting the amount of possessions benefits the team with the worst defense in the league.

What is your point? I was wrong? Ok. You win. I was wrong.

           

gone

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 9244
Offline
#18 : December 03, 2012, 05:48:20 PM

Articles like this one assume people are idiots.  Everyone is aware of the fact you can only score once.  And that barring turnovers the number of possessions are the same.  These are blatantly obvious facts. And still people support the idea of keeping the ball away.  I suppose it pumps up the egos of those who follow the writer's "logic" to assume people who support as simply drooling idiots who completely miss these facts, rather than actually thinking about why those people believe in playing keep away.

Of course, the writer and his "supporters" are completely and 100% wrong in their assumptions, but hey, it's hard work to think more than one step in a chain of logic.  In a game where emotion and momentum have impact,  from people getting into a rhythm or on a hot streak, to simple "wear down" of a defense that has to play a lot of snaps, there are a host of reasons why TOP matters.  But if it helps make you feel like a rare and special flower who's unique brilliance enables you to see what everyone else was to stupid to figure out, have at it.
: December 03, 2012, 05:50:42 PM caradoc

Blaze688

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3092
Offline
#19 : December 03, 2012, 08:17:20 PM

Caradoc, your condescending, high-horsed tone is betrayed by the crap coming through your keyboard.

Articles like this one assume people are idiots.  Everyone is aware of the fact you can only score once.  And that barring turnovers the number of possessions are the same.  These are blatantly obvious facts.

You're right, it's all obvious, and people still think you "slow down" an opposing offense by running the ball.  They're the same people who claimed Tebow's three-and-outs were better than Orton's, because his runs kept the game clock ticking, and the defense got some much needed rest -- despite the fact that, in a three-and-out, the play clock counts off 160 seconds regardless of offensive methodology.  People are this stupid, and your first mistake is giving them too much credit.

And still people support the idea of keeping the ball away.  I suppose it pumps up the egos of those who follow the writer's "logic" to assume people who support as simply drooling idiots who completely miss these facts, rather than actually thinking about why those people believe in playing keep away.

People support the idea because ESPN tells them to.  We all hear, "Win the time of possession battle, and you have a great shot at winning the game," and the masses don't consider, Hey, maybe the team with the lead runs the ball more to close out a contest, and is thus awarded the time of possession victory.  It comes from the same contrived black hole from which, "We're undefeated when Blount gets 18+ carries!" is derived.

Of course, the writer and his "supporters" are completely and 100% wrong in their assumptions, but hey, it's hard work to think more than one step in a chain of logic.

No, we're not.  But I know it's hard when your ideology is challenged.

In a game where emotion and momentum have impact...

Momentum is not quantifiable.  The concept of "momentum" is a fragile one; a wide receiver beats you on three consecutive downs?  An interception does a lot to kill his momentum.

...from people getting into a rhythm or on a hot streak...

I risk redundancy here, but... momentum isn't quantifiable, and should not be a principle focus of any game plan.

...to simple "wear down" of a defense that has to play a lot of snaps...

Wear them down, how?  By charging all your blockers into the ever-morphing fray of rotational defenders, and exhausting the big men on your offense -- the ones who never come out of the game?  If I wanted to wear down a defense, I'd consider rolling out my quarterback and throwing intermediate passes, thus forcing the defensive lineman to run.  Forcing the linebackers to run.  Forcing the defensive backs to run.  Earning clock stoppages on inevitable incompletions, so I can do it again, and again, and again, and again.

Employing the run to exhaust a defense is another myth, born of running to demoralize, which is a real -- but entirely different -- concept.

... there are a host of reasons why TOP matters.  But if it helps make you feel like a rare and special flower who's unique brilliance enables you to see what everyone else was to stupid to figure out, have at it.

You're blind by the mythos of NFL lore.  But that's okay.  So are most people.


dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46190
Offline
#20 : December 03, 2012, 09:16:45 PM

You opening like this "Caradoc, your condescending, high-horsed tone is betrayed by the crap coming through your keyboard." keeps those folks selling the Carnegie course smile knowing there are still sales to be made...

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

Dolorous Jason

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 17053
Online
#21 : December 04, 2012, 07:38:22 AM

Caradoc, your condescending, high-horsed tone is betrayed by the crap coming through your keyboard.

Articles like this one assume people are idiots.  Everyone is aware of the fact you can only score once.  And that barring turnovers the number of possessions are the same.  These are blatantly obvious facts.

You're right, it's all obvious, and people still think you "slow down" an opposing offense by running the ball.  They're the same people who claimed Tebow's three-and-outs were better than Orton's, because his runs kept the game clock ticking, and the defense got some much needed rest -- despite the fact that, in a three-and-out, the play clock counts off 160 seconds regardless of offensive methodology.  People are this stupid, and your first mistake is giving them too much credit.

And still people support the idea of keeping the ball away.  I suppose it pumps up the egos of those who follow the writer's "logic" to assume people who support as simply drooling idiots who completely miss these facts, rather than actually thinking about why those people believe in playing keep away.

People support the idea because ESPN tells them to.  We all hear, "Win the time of possession battle, and you have a great shot at winning the game," and the masses don't consider, Hey, maybe the team with the lead runs the ball more to close out a contest, and is thus awarded the time of possession victory.  It comes from the same contrived black hole from which, "We're undefeated when Blount gets 18+ carries!" is derived.

Of course, the writer and his "supporters" are completely and 100% wrong in their assumptions, but hey, it's hard work to think more than one step in a chain of logic.

No, we're not.  But I know it's hard when your ideology is challenged.

In a game where emotion and momentum have impact...

Momentum is not quantifiable.  The concept of "momentum" is a fragile one; a wide receiver beats you on three consecutive downs?  An interception does a lot to kill his momentum.

...from people getting into a rhythm or on a hot streak...

I risk redundancy here, but... momentum isn't quantifiable, and should not be a principle focus of any game plan.

...to simple "wear down" of a defense that has to play a lot of snaps...

Wear them down, how?  By charging all your blockers into the ever-morphing fray of rotational defenders, and exhausting the big men on your offense -- the ones who never come out of the game?  If I wanted to wear down a defense, I'd consider rolling out my quarterback and throwing intermediate passes, thus forcing the defensive lineman to run.  Forcing the linebackers to run.  Forcing the defensive backs to run.  Earning clock stoppages on inevitable incompletions, so I can do it again, and again, and again, and again.

Employing the run to exhaust a defense is another myth, born of running to demoralize, which is a real -- but entirely different -- concept.

... there are a host of reasons why TOP matters.  But if it helps make you feel like a rare and special flower who's unique brilliance enables you to see what everyone else was to stupid to figure out, have at it.

You're blind by the mythos of NFL lore.  But that's okay.  So are most people.

: December 04, 2012, 07:41:25 AM Fire Mark Dummynik

What is your point? I was wrong? Ok. You win. I was wrong.

           

Blaze688

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3092
Offline
#22 : December 04, 2012, 10:45:14 AM

You opening like this "Caradoc, your condescending, high-horsed tone is betrayed by the crap coming through your keyboard." keeps those folks selling the Carnegie course smile knowing there are still sales to be made...

God bless Carnegie, but I'm not trying to win friends.


GOOD ONE.

Page: 1 2
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Time of possession won't matter « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools