A True Fan

From another awesome excuse to not write his own material:

I've officially had it. As of today, I become a Titans fan. I can't name a single player on the team, but at least their coach doesn't make excuses. I just can't take the Eagles' lack of responsibility anymore.

- Chris

We shall be sorry to lose a true fan like yourself, Chris.  Godspeed.

Comments

[keener]

Awesome. I can't take it either. Both of these guys need to go. It's beyond comedy at this point.

[EDITED: No no, see, it's the GMBT for links to your site.]

[BFH]

Keener -- You're obviously very clever.

Go try your luck somewhere else.

[Eric]

What was the link?

[Derek]

Spam, but I'll allow it in the GMBT.

[Tracer Bullet]

I suppose Chris never noticed all those excuses Fisher made for Pacman Jones or Vince Young or Albert Haynesworth after he stomped on Gurode's face, but I don't know why I'm applying logic to this anyway.

[Paul]

Mike Fisher is a hell of coach who is doing more this year with (what appears to be) a less talented team than the Eagles. Even if you like Andy Reid and think he's a hell of a coach, you have to admit his style of football does not win in this league.

Look at the top 3 teams in the league, the Giants, Titans, and Panthers. They are all in the top 6 in rushing ypg and top 8 in defense. You win in this league by a) rushing the ball down the defenses throats and SETTING UP the pass, not vice versa and b) stopping the run and rushing the passer. So we've got that rushing the passer part down, and the stopping the run works about 90% of the time.

Maybe our offensive line can't run block and isn't built to run the ball 30+ times a game, but let me ask...WHO'S FAULT IS THAT?!?! If Andy really did want to commit to the run he would set up his offensive line for that, bring in a power running back to complement Westbrook, and actually practice the run.

[BFH]

Paul -- The Giants and Titans offense's are the exception to the modern NFL rules. The most successful teams of the last ten years (Rams, Eagles, Colts, Patriots) were hardly "run the ball down your throat" offenses.

They could run successfully, yes. But the Giants run offense is a completely new and incredible phenomenon. The Titans win like the Ravens used to -- an physical defense and an offense that does just enough.

[Paul]

BFH,

There's no denying that the current "top" teams are exceptions to the norm the past couple of years. However, just by watching the Giants and to a lesser degree, the Titans play, there's also no denying its effectiveness. The NFL is a constantly evolving league and what worked last year, may not work this year.

The Eagles-Giants matchup is a perfect example. I don't have the stats (I'm sure Derek does) but I think it's safe to say that when either teams starts a new series of downs, the Giants overall have a better chance of getting a first down. The Eagles are a team who likes to get yards in bunches, much like the Pats and Colts of yesteryear (though not nearly as effective). So when they do throw incomplete on 1st, run for 2 yards on 2nd, and come up short on 3rd and 8, they turn the ball over. The Eagles are a team who either score, or have a 3 and out (I'm probably oversimplifying but generally that's true). This philosophy is fine against a team like the Cowboys (even though we lost) or Steetlers or Bengals (which we would've won easily if not for some unforced turnovers) because they are similar teams who will give the ball back with either a 3 and out or a score without wasting too much clock. Therefore, you have a much higher number of offensive possessions. Against teams like the Giants and Redskins, when you turn the ball over, you might not get the ball back for 7 minutes which severely limit your number of possessions.

It's like rolling a dice and trying to hit a pair (aka score). You have about a 20% chance of doing so every time you roll (aka get a possession), so it goes without saying that the number of times you get a chance to roll, the higher the chance of hitting a pair. The teams that are winning this year are the teams which are severely limiting your amount of rolls. Against them you may hit it 3 times a game. Against a team who gives up twice as many rolls, you may hit it 6 times a game. And for a team like the Eagles, who greatly rely on those rolls to succeed, teams like the Giants and Skins are extremely dangerous.

[Derek]

It will be interesting to see how much noise Tennessee can make in the playoffs with that group of receivers. If their defense slips even a little, things could get tricky for them.

[Paul]

Derek, I agree but who in the AFC is such a big threat? The Pats and the Colts aren't the monsters they once were. The Steelers are good but as many teams have proven, you can shut their offense down. Maybe Favre and the Jets?

And at least they'll be in the playoffs!!! >:o

[Paul]

Also, in all honesty, if you were a Steelers fan, would you feel better about your teams chances with their current offense, or the old run it 30+ times and average 130 a game offense? With their current defense and their offense of old, they might AVERAGE a 2 to 1 time of possession advantage.

[jd]

i didn't make it through kotite and rhodes to quit now.

[Eric]

Statistically, throughout the history of the NFL, teams that throw well and stop the pass are more successful than teams that run the ball well and stop the run.

So, yes, the league could be evolving, beginning this season with more running than passing, but the constant in the NFL has been the ability to pass the ball.

[Paul]

Eric,

Not sure I completely agree with that statement. Looking at the past 10 Superbowl winners I think it's safe to say you can get be more dificient in passing than running in order to succeed (or be great at both to account for poor defense). Here's they are an what was their offensive strength based purely on league rank that year...

98' Denver - Running
99' St. Louis - Passing
00' Baltimore - Running
01' New England - Running
02' Tampa Bay - Passing
03' New England - Passing
04' New England - Running
05' Pittsburgh - Running
06' Indianapolis - Passing
07' Giants - Running

Final tally, 6 running 4 passing. Of those 10 teams, 4 ranked in the bottom 10 of the league passing and only 2 ranked in the bottom 10 for running. Also, the 2 teams who ranked in the bottom 10 running were Tampa and 03' New England, both of which had the top defense in the league that year. I believe you have a better chance in this league running the ball and stopping the run than vice versa.

[Derek]

Paul, that's a correlation/causation issue, though. When you win a lot of games, you end up with a lot of rushing yards, since you're salting away a lot of fourth quarter leads.

The thing about both Tennessee and New York is that they have very efficient passing games, even though they don't use them to rack up a lot of yards:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamoff

vs.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&offensiveStatisticCategory=TEAM_PASSING&conference=ALL&role=TM&season=2008&seasonType=REG&d-447263-s=PASSING_NET_YARDS_GAME_AVG&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-n=1

So it's not like they can't pass.

[Eric]

Well, you can argue that the best team won because of their respective passing or rushing attacks. However, I think in some of those cases, especially looking at last year, that the rushing v. passing could go either year.

I think we'd all agree if the Patriots played the Giants in a best of 7 that the Giants probably wouldn't win the series.

There's a list out there (that I'm trying to find) that shows the greatest passing, rushing, rush defense, and pass defense teams throughout the history of the NFL. The ones that pass well and defend the pass well are the teams that have better overall records and generally more success.

And when I state "success", I don't mean that they have a majority of victories in Super Bowls. I'm talking about relative success in comparison. And it's largely on the side of passing.

[Eric]

As sort of an explanation, last year's Vikings and the Falcons two years ago were statistically one of the best rush offenses ever. The Vikings were also one of the best rush defensive teams ever. Yet they went nowhere. I think they finished 7-9 or 8-8.

While the Patriots, who did not win the Super Bowl, amassed a 16-0 regular season record with one of the greatest passing offenses of all time.