Emo Andy Dalton after a trip to Sephora on Groundhog Day (Carr thread)

[RaiderandBulldog]

https://mobile.twitter.com/Raiders/stat ... 3878636548

[Jeremyturner1976]

[quote=16 to 88 post_id=1086557]lol!

As stated repeatedly you are not the only one on here throwing it in there! I was just doing what I normally do around here is pointing something out. No harm no foul just something to think about...[/quote]Google Daniel Jones Turnovers.

Same situation, same huge fumbling issue. Tons of sources where they include fumbles and ints because they are looking at turnovers.

There ya go, there is your sample. If a QB has a problem keeping the ball, it is relevant.

[Attyla]

we moved far a field from

I'm not a fan of using the fumble statistic from any QB in the league and it really needs to be put into perspective

to

Never stated that. TD-INT-FUMBLE ratio has never been used as a metic

[16 to 88]

[quote=Jeremyturner1976 post_id=1086560]Google Daniel Jones Turnovers.

Same situation, same huge fumbling issue. Tons of sources where they include fumbles and ints because they are looking at turnovers.

There ya go, there is your sample. If a QB has a problem keeping the ball, it is relevant.[/quote]And your point is?

"turnovers" being your key search word which you used intentionally. If you substitute it for interceptions all those articles don't show up. And when you go into stats fumbles appear under, surprise surprise... under rushing.

There is no category for TD-INT-FUMBLES.

Again, please show me this metric. It doesn't exist, at least not to my knowledge.

Additionally, if one searches for just "Daniel Jones" which most will. Under the "all" page which is what comes up after you hit the search button guess what it shows?

His passing stats which includes

comp%
yards
TD-INT ratio
and rate

With absolutely no mention of fumbles.

[Attyla]

OK fellas, no more talk of TDs-INTs-Fumbles

that is not a thing

hope that helps

[16 to 88]

[quote=Attyla post_id=1086566]OK fellas, no more talk of TDs-INTs-Fumbles

that is not a thing

hope that helps[/quote]It's not.

It's not a statistical category, it has never existed and you know it.

Still waiting for you to show me where it used as a standard. You know it isn't.

[Jeremyturner1976]

[quote=16 to 88 post_id=1086564]And your point is?

"turnovers" being your key search word which you used intentionally. If you substitute it for interceptions all those articles don't show up. And when you go into stats fumbles appear under, surprise surprise... under rushing.

There is no category for TD-INT-FUMBLES.

Again, please show me this metric. It doesn't exist, at least not to my knowledge.

Additionally, if one searches for just "Daniel Jones" which most will. Under the "all" page which is what comes up after you hit the search button guess what it shows?

His passing stats which includes

comp%
yards
TD-INT ratio
and rate

With absolutely no mention of fumbles.[/quote]So my point is, we are looking at turnovers here, in this thread - used intentionally.

Just like my google search did.

Just like people outside of this board have discussed in great detail about Daniel Jones... used intentionally.

[16 to 88]

[quote=Jeremyturner1976 post_id=1086569]So my point is, we are looking at turnovers here, in this thread - used intentionally.

Just like my google search did.

Just like people outside of this board have discussed in great detail about Daniel Jones... used intentionally.[/quote]If that's the case you are off course from what I have been discussing.

[Attyla]

[quote=16 to 88 post_id=1086568]It's not.

It's not a statistical category, it has never existed and you know it.

Still waiting for you to show me where it used as a standard. You know it isn't.[/quote]denying the existance of a thing does not make it so. Even if the talking heads or the NFL does not identify your latest windmill, it does not remove the fact that all statistics are simply numbers coupled together to form a conclusion. TDs exist, interceptions exist, and fumbles exist. You do understand that even if your label does not exist, the actual numbers do? Discussion of the numbers and coupling those numbers with other numbers can provide some clarity. You want us to say it, so fine, your actual TD-INT-Fumble is not a stat. I hope that makes you happy.

That being said, Carr's TD to Fumble ratio is really bad in comparison to the league as a whole. When you add in the INT numbers it becomes even worse.

[raiders93]

[quote=Attyla post_id=1086571]denying the existance of a thing does not make it so. Even if the talking heads or the NFL does not identify your latest windmill, it does not remove the fact that all statistics are simply numbers coupled together to form a conclusion. TDs exist, interceptions exist, and fumbles exist. You do understand that even if your label does not exist, the actual numbers do? Discussion of the numbers and coupling those numbers with other numbers can provide some clarity. You want us to say it, so fine, your actual TD-INT-Fumble is not a stat. I hope that makes you happy.

That being said, Carr's TD to Fumble ratio is really bad in comparison to the league as a whole. When you add in the INT numbers it becomes even worse.[/quote]https://c.tenor.com/W9diMJjnDDQAAAAM/co ... -think.gif

[Attyla]

[quote=raiders93 post_id=1086572]https://c.tenor.com/W9diMJjnDDQAAAAM/co ... -think.gif[/quote]https://i.imgflip.com/225eki.jpg

[16 to 88]

[quote=Attyla post_id=1086571]You want us to say it, so fine, your actual TD-INT-Fumble is not a stat.[/quote]Of course it isn't. I have been nice the whole time pointing this out.

I have never stated that you can't point out fumbles which would be ridiculous it's simply not used as a metic with any regularity or to be more blunt... EVER, when included with TD's. It's always been TD-INT ratio. Always.

And again, I don't know it all and I have never professed too knowing it all which would be silly. But from everything I can remember ever read on this forum or elsewhere nobody brings up fumbles of other QB's when they show passing stats.

See my Tom Brady example used twice in this thread.

[Jeremyturner1976]

[quote=16 to 88 post_id=1086577]Of course it isn't. I have been nice the whole time pointing this out.

I have never stated that you can't point out fumbles which would be ridiculous it's simply not used as a metic with any regularity or to be more blunt... EVER, when included with TD's. It's always been TD-INT ratio. Always.

And again, I don't know it all and I have never professed too knowing it all which would be silly. But from everything I can remember ever read on this forum or elsewhere nobody brings up fumbles of other QB's when they show passing stats.

See my Tom Brady example used twice in this thread.[/quote]So, this original post that has caused all of this, can you point to the part where he said 'passing stats'?

See my Daniel Jones sample for people outside of this board discussing touchdowns to turnovers - which was exactly what was discussed with the post in question.

Outside of this board.

[Attyla]

[quote=16 to 88 post_id=1086577]Of course it isn't. I have been nice the whole time pointing this out.

I have never stated that you can't point out fumbles which would be ridiculous it's simply not used as a metic with any regularity or to be more blunt... EVER, when included with TD's. It's always been TD-INT ratio. Always.

And again, I don't know it all and I have never professed too knowing it all which would be silly. But from everything I can remember ever read on this forum or elsewhere nobody brings up fumbles of other QB's when they show passing stats.

See my Tom Brady example used twice in this thread.[/quote]ok, so now we have moved the goalposts. It is not used as a metric with any regularity yet it is listed on many stat lines. How is that not regularly? And while you did not say you can't point out stats, you basically told us "I'm not a fan of using the fumble statistic from any QB in the league and it really needs to be put into perspective." And you did say talking about fumbles "but this is the only place that i'm aware of that includes a QB fumbles into the equation." which has been proven false. Then you did say, " But when only a minute fraction of Carr detractors are the only one's using it as a metric in the football world it's being disingenuous." which is a huge reach since fumble discussions are pretty easy to find on the net (google it.) So it seems to me you contradict yourself by implication repeatedly. You seem to think talking about fumbles for a QB is nigh on taboo or at the very least that you are not a fan of the discussion as being relevant? Seems to me this has become a thing. Who cares if someone ties TDs and fumbles together to draw a conclusion? Answer: Only you.

So jump on your donkey and go fight your windmills. You are the only one who thinks this "not being a thing" matters. As I have asked several times, who the f[raiders_icon]ck cares if it is a thing or not? Carr and his fumbles have made it a thing for his entire career. Lower than average TD rate and a far higher than average fumble rate. That is a thing, not that it matters. What matters is winning, and those two things affect the one thing that does matter.

[16 to 88]

[quote=Jeremyturner1976 post_id=1086580]So, this original post that has caused all of this, can you point to the part where he said 'passing stats'?

See my Daniel Jones sample for people outside of this board discussing touchdowns to turnovers - which was exactly what was discussed with the post in question.

Outside of this board.[/quote] at the

Come on Jermery. He clearly uses a TD-INT-FUMBLE ratio.

CLEARLY.

Which is fine. What I'm pointing out is it is NOT the standard (which you know) that is used. I'm sure I'm older then you perhaps way older and I have NEVER... EVER written TD-INT- FUMBLE when discussing stats. I have some 10,000 posts currently and I read a LOT more than I post and I don't recall a guy like Brady or Rodgers or what have you ever being mentioned about a TD-INT-FUMBLE ratio It's always TD-INT.

Could it be re-written after a 100 years of football. I guess? But then you are going down what I pointed out is a very slippery slope. If you wish, you can find fumbles under the statistic, "rushing."

[Attyla]

so now we are down to one guy used the thing?

you are bent over one guys post? holy f[raiders_icon]ck