NFL 2022: The Week 14 thread

Holy hell, Twitch had the privilege of streaming two front page sh*tshows tonight: the finale of TNF and the finale of The Game Awards.

Wow was that a complete screw job by the refs or what?

Baker's performance last night was a further indictment of the former Panthers' HC.

Scheme matters, y'all, and in two days the Rams figured out what Baker can do (roll out, throw the deep ball) and didn't make him do stuff he can't do (RPOs, dink and dunk).

There was plenty of bad Baker last night in the first half (I went to bed at halftime), but he made a bunch of throws (especially on the final drive) that he wasn't asked to do in Carolina, much less actually do them.

Good for him!

IMAGE(https://media.giphy.com/media/FVtb0iWWUgedW5ShiY/giphy.gif)

*Legion* wrote:

*LEGION*'S "WHERE WILL OBJ GO" POWER RANKINGS, WEEK 14 EDITION:

1. His couch

Perhaps relevant: Odell Beckham Jr.: I don’t see the point in playing in regular season.

Interesting mixed messages from the 49ers on Jimmy G's recovery timeline.

Kyle Shanahan tried to downplay the possibility of Jimmy's return, calling it a "way outside chance" that he returns.

But according to John Lynch, the Niners are not going to put Jimmy on IR.

Why would you use a roster spot on a guy that you think only has a "way outside chance" of coming back, and who would be eligible to return from IR by the time that "outside chance" rolled around?

Quote Lynch:

“I think we’re just going to carry him on our roster, and we’re going to kind of see how this rehab process goes. There’s a natural healing process that has to take place.”

That sure sounds like they're less pessimistic about Jimmy than Shanahan was trying to sell.

Might also explain why they didn't even place a waiver claim on Baker (which would've been moot anyway given the team's low waiver priority, but they didn't even bother to try).

So, who knows? But in the spirit of actions speaking louder than words, spending a roster spot on Jimmy sure seems to say the chance of return is more than "way outside".

I can’t wait for Jimmy G to be the Niners starting QB next season!

QB?

He's going to be the head coach.

Maybe the GM, too!

I am trying to think of a scenario in that Brock Purdy wins enough to have the Niners still playing when Jimmy G returns and the Niners decide to go back to Jimmy "I threw an INT with my Eyes Closed in the Superbowl" Garopollo.

If any playoff team is going to keep themselves alive purely on defense and run game, it will be the 49ers.

Im still sticking with the Niners to win the SB. Purdy probably starts a HoF career arc starting this season

Or he becomes the next Nick Foles.

I'm OK with either of those outcomes. It's definitely got to be one of the two.

Not really relevant to the week of games but was doing some thinking about how we perceive the "greatness" of individual players.

On Bomani's podcast, he and Dominque Foxworth were talking about how the game of football has changed. I'm oversimplifying but they noted how the RB position has become essentially worthless because the game revolves around the short passing game. While that has increased entertainment value (tons more scoring) it's altered the nature of the game.

Four yards and a pile of dust? Gone.

No more Barry Sanders, no more Earl Campbells (exception: King Henry), no more Walter Paytons. (Counterpoint: CMC?)

Why? Advanced analytics have infiltrated the game and proven the value of passing.

This got me thinking and I went to check All-Pro selections (more on that in a sec) and got caught in a rabbit hole on, of all things, Passer Rating.

Another aside before bringing this together: in watching the World Cup, one thing I've always appreciated about that sport is how there is a tacit acknowledgement that the game is a human endeavor with a meaningful relationship, even partnership, with art and NOT merely a math equation to be optimized. This is reflected in the traditions of the sport, the simplicity (11-on-11, goals, non-standard pitch size, ref + watch + whistle = game on), the tremendously subjective nature of fouls and good sportsmanship and even the randomness of deflections/etc. The game is talked about in terms of "deserving" to win based on style of play, even "beauty" and the sublime nature of certain athletic acts. Is this type of talk part of how we analyze and appreciate blocking or tackling in football? I'd argue no. Back to analytics.

In looking at Passer Rating, which ostensibly objectively determines which player is mathematically more valuable than another, we get some "hardcore facts" that produce some interesting outcomes. And by interesting, I mean, "This is where advanced analytics is lying."

Here are some players that rank higher, in Passer Rating, than Dan Marino and Brett Favre:
- Mitch Trubisky
- Andy Dalton
- Marcus Mariota
- Jameis
- Kirk Cousins
- Jimmy G. (#5 all-time)

So when we're talking "greatness" it appears that math equations might not be so helpful. I know we're going to soon face the, "Is Eli a HOFer?" question and we're already having problems figuring out what to do with Matthew Stafford.

Why not look at a subjective, yet still quantifiable thing, like All-Pro selections (as opposed to the massively inflated Pro Bowl numbers) for determining who is in the HOF? Pretty sure everyone would agree that All-Pro's really were the best of their year and when looked at across a career, tell us who really was the better middle linebacker or, gasp, the better quarterback. It would also allow for comparison across eras since it is not based on volume of a particular stat (I think I saw there were 1300yds combined in an FCS playoff game yesterday?).

I don't care about trying to parse out the relative value that a pretty good player who has NEVER struck fear in the hearts of his opponents (Stafford) has done for his team's success. I'd much rather focus on what I consider to be greatness, which is when opponents acknowledge, "That guy's a problem." And those are All-Pros, not guys who contributed to team success but couldn't break the T2 for their position.

Saints and Bengals fined for faking injuries in the middle of games. The NFL's only doing this to show up FIFA during the World Cup, I bet.

Top_Shelf wrote:

In looking at Passer Rating, which ostensibly objectively determines which player is mathematically more valuable than another, we get some "hardcore facts" that produce some interesting outcomes. And by interesting, I mean, "This is where advanced analytics is lying."

Here are some players that rank higher, in Passer Rating, than Dan Marino and Brett Favre:
- Mitch Trubisky
- Andy Dalton
- Marcus Mariota
- Jameis
- Kirk Cousins
- Jimmy G. (#5 all-time)

So when we're talking "greatness" it appears that math equations might not be so helpful. I know we're going to soon face the, "Is Eli a HOFer?" question and we're already having problems figuring out what to do with Matthew Stafford.

Comparing passer ratings across eras is like comparing stock prices across eras. It’s not a meaningful comparison. But since zero people in existence are using passer rating to argue Andy Dalton above Dan Marino, I think this point is well understood. Passer rating is a useful metric relative to one’s peers, who compiled their passer ratings in the same environment. In different years under different rules, the numbers are different.

Why not look at a subjective, yet still quantifiable thing, like All-Pro selections (as opposed to the massively inflated Pro Bowl numbers) for determining who is in the HOF?

All-Pro selections are heavily factored into HOF arguments.

No, there's no need to adjust for era, just take the raw stats from today, compare them to the stats from the past, and that's good enough. That's why Matt Ryan is a sure-fire Hall of Famer; with 1,500 more yards or so, he'll move up to #5 on the all-time passing yardage list, and that clearly means a ticket to Canton is being punched.

Oh, hi, I'm an r/nfl poster from, well, before this year, talking about Matt Ryan.

I think what Milkman is describing is what I'm hearing out there.

And part of the point of advanced analytics is to be able to quantify something...and I think there are limitations to that. Maybe a somewhat nuanced statement: analytics aren't THE WORST, there are challenges though.

All-Pro's definitely do factor in to HOF votes. But I am not sure they factor enough. Eli? Matt Ryan? Stafford?

Between them, a single All-Pro team.

Well none of those guys are in the Hall yet. If Eli gets in, it will be on the back of his two rings. Without those, he's not even in the discussion.

All-Pro has its flaws. Unless you think Brett Favre and Tom Brady were equals, and Peyton Manning was more than twice as good as each of them... (or, if you count second-team All-Pros, then Manning is just shy of twice as good...)

When you dig into All-Pros, because of the fact that they're so limited, you'll find some guys racked up fewer than others purely because there was less competition for the crown at one time than at another. If there's 1 or 2 elite WRs at a time, those guys are gonna rack up tons of APs. If there's 5 or 6 at one time, then everyone's taking home fewer awards.

There's also a strong popularity factor running through it. Did Eddie George deserve his one All-Pro in 2000, where he ran for 3.7 yards per carry, and didn't lead the league in anything except total carries? Was he really better than Edgerrin James and Robert Smith that year? No, but he was more popular and played on a better team.

All-Pro is a useful metric, but if you're looking at it to be the be-all end-all, things will fall apart pretty quickly. Much like with those passer rating stats, you have to consider the context of the time.

That's fair.

I guess I'm just tired of hearing about things like team success for determining an individual player's ability?

What would you look to in order to differentiate between team/player?

Top_Shelf wrote:

That's fair.

I guess I'm just tired of hearing about things like team success for determining an individual player's ability?

What would you look to in order to differentiate between team/player?

There's no one easy thing, you have to take it all into account.

The thing I value most though is having watched the player and evaluated his play directly. That's why I don't have strong opinions about players who played prior to the late '80s.

Awards, stats relative to their peers, and advanced metrics are all nice as supporting evidence to an argument, but too much of a player's skill doesn't translate directly or cleanly to a stat book, and awards are kind of all-or-nothing things.

*Legion* wrote:

If Eli gets in, it will be on the back of his two rings.

When he gets in, is his bust just going to be David Tyree's helmet?

It's going to be of Gisele.

No, it's actually going to have Asante Samuel's face.

iaintgotnopants wrote:
*Legion* wrote:

If Eli gets in, it will be on the back of his two rings.

When he gets in, is his bust just going to be David Tyree's helmet?

I'd hope they "accidentally" produce a second one of Peyton, and then it turns out to be solid chocolate covered in foil.

Fantastic write-up on Andrew Luck.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/sto...

Looks like the Ravens @ Steelers has become the Backup Bowl

Oh my god, they concussed Kenny.

What the hell happened with that punt attempt from the Giants? Did the ball just slip out of the hands of the punter?

Media sure it talking a lot about Brady and the Niners. Oh man the hate in my body with the potential of Bosa and Brady on the same team. I will be shooting blue lightning from my fingers.

Pink Stripes wrote:

What the hell happened with that punt attempt from the Giants? Did the ball just slip out of the hands of the punter?

I love that the penalty call was "illegal kick by the kicking team".

Maybe he was trying for a very long drop kick FG.