Are you ready for some FOOTBALL - Final Regular Season Week

[Sava]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


You mean as opposed to 2000?

It may surprise you to know that in 2003 the Eagles running game was 9th in the league while in 2000 the Eagles running attack was only 15th.

Sure the running attack was better in 2002 than 2003... but it was 7th in the league and about 200 yards more in total (12.5 yards extra per game). Not that much better than 2003 at all.

So I'm sorry if I disagree with you pulling reasons out of your ass, but blaming lower than you'd want stats on a lack of a running game doesn't wash.

I watched plenty of McNabb and he was basically the same QB in 2003 as he was in 2000. A bit better in scanning the field, but not that much. Still prone to run a lot (in 2002 with the lack of 'inconsistency in the RB position', McNabb only played 10 games, but ran 63 times.. a far higher run percentage per game than in any year of his career).

sigh...

You can't just cherry pick a single stat and use it to advance your argument!



it's about his progression as a QB!!!

The overall numbers show this trend and progression. In addition to that, if you were to watch tape of McNabb you would see the difference CLEAR AS DAY!



Why do I even bother?

It's like trying to teach a caveman Quantum Physics!!

[Imran Siddiqui]

You say I'm cherry picking a single stat, yet I'm looking at completition percentage, yard per attempt, total passing yardage, total rushes per season, rushing yards by the team, etc. Which one stat am I cherry picking?!!

I love this whole, even though the stats don't show it, he was an entirely different player argument! It's as silly as the old-time baseball fans who say they don't care what the stats say, they know what they saw (ie, like those who say Derek Jeter is the best defensive SS in baseball).

Ah, showing troglodytes the joy of statistical analysis.

[Sava]

and none of those stats reflect the change in McNabb's PASSING STYLE

I already posted the relevant stats. I'm not going to repeat my arguments.

Reread them. Hopefully you will understand them.

Not one NFL analyst (even the stupid ones) is going to disagree with a thing I am saying.

I'll just add this pathetic argument of yours to the archive of Imran's Nuggets of Football Wisdom that I'm keeping. (It's a text file on my desktop)

btw, you might want to look at McNabb's rushing totals and compare them to his passer rating...

look at how his passer rating goes up and how his rushing totals go down over the same time period

YOU THINK MAYBE THERE IS A CORRELATION THERE?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I already posted the relevant stats.

I believe you've posted... NO stats . But continue on your rant.

you might want to look at McNabb's rushing totals and compare them to his passer rating...

look at how his passer rating goes up and how his rushing totals go down over the same time period

Frankly, I prefer rushing attempts, starting from his 2nd year (his first full year starting) to the year before Owens came along). His yardage totals detail how well he ran, not how much.

2000: 86 [5.38 attempts per game]
2001: 82 [5.13 attempts per game]
2002: 63 (in 10 games) [6.3 attempts per game]
2003: 71 [4.43 attempts per game]

Not a whole lot of difference there. In 2003 he was running for 1 attempt per game less compared to 2000, and in 2002 he was running more than he ever has.

Passer rating:
2000: 77.8
2001: 84.3
2002: 86.0
2003: 79.6

Interestingly, McNabb had the highest passer rating during that streach the year that he ran the most times per game that he ever had in his career.

And like I've pointed out before, in 2003, the Eagles had about the same rushing numbers as in 2002.

It seems he was fairly consistent. Nothing really indicates that he would have been a 90+ passer rating QB without the infusion of Owens to the team (interestingly enough, before he went down to injury this season, McNabb's passer rating was an 85.0, right around where he was in 2001-2002).

Wanna try again?

[reismark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
(interestingly enough, before he went down to injury this season, McNabb's passer rating was an 85.0, right around where he was in 2001-2002).

And just so it's said... It's not like he was, you know, healthy or anything before the injury took him out of the flow. He was playing injured for almost the balance of the season. I'd dare argue that his passer rating would have been up near last year's number if he'd been healthy before going on IR.

Sorry, Sava... Chicago may be 11-4 against all expectations, but you've been pwned this time.

[Ming]

At least the Bears pwned Vick and the Falcons this year

[Sava]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


I believe you've posted... NO stats . But continue on your rant.

Go look at post 271.

reismark: not so much... if you think Imran is correct... you need to start taking the short bus to school

interestingly enough, before he went down to injury this season, McNabb's passer rating was an 85.0, right around where he was in 2001-2002

AND HE WAS ON PACE FOR OVER 4,000 PASSING YARDS!!!



God I hate having to repeat my arguments.

Learn how to read.

[Jaguar]

I've followed McNabb carefully this season because he was my first round fantasy football pick.

Over the first four games, he piled up 1333 yards passing with 11 touchdowns and 3 interceptions. That's pace for literally a 5000 yard season. He was hurt by game four, and he was hurt worse by game five. Against Dallas, the start of the Eagles meltdown, he was playing with three injuries.

If his offense didn't have injury and chemistry problems, he would have had Manning-like numbers this year. 40 touchdowns and 4500 yards easily, considering how much the Eagles love to throw.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Jaguar
I've followed McNabb carefully this season because he was my first round fantasy football pick.

Over the first four games, he piled up 1333 yards passing with 11 touchdowns and 3 interceptions. That's pace for literally a 5000 yard season. He was hurt by game four, and he was hurt worse by game five. Against Dallas, the start of the Eagles meltdown, he was playing with three injuries.

If his offense didn't have injury and chemistry problems, he would have had Manning-like numbers this year. 40 touchdowns and 4500 yards easily, considering how much the Eagles love to throw.

but this has nothing to do with his progression from a scrambling QB to more of a pocket passer...

NOPE NOTHING AT ALL!!!


Imran: just type "McNabb pocket passer" into Google or Yahoo... read the articles that come up.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by reismark
And just so it's said... It's not like he was, you know, healthy or anything before the injury took him out of the flow. He was playing injured for almost the balance of the season. I'd dare argue that his passer rating would have been up near last year's number if he'd been healthy before going on IR.

That's true. But I wonder what his rating would have been if healthy and without Owens. Remember Owens had a very good early season as well. He played 7 games had 47 receptions for 763 yards and 6 TDs. Over a full season (assuming same circumstances) that's 107 catches for 1744 yards and 14 TDs. That's phenomenal!

Now I'm not saying that without Owens, McNabb turns back into 2003 McNabb, but you can't deny that Owens had a huge effect on McNabb's development.

but this has nothing to do with his progression from a scrambling QB to more of a pocket passer...

I wonder who you are arguing against, Sava. I never made the point that McNabb didn't run less last year and this year. My argument is that he did not run less until Owens got to the team (the rushing attempts dropped to almost half of what it was). It was Owens who helped him mature into an elite passer. Perhaps he will build on those lesson when Owens is gone, but it'll be tougher.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


Frankly, I prefer rushing attempts, starting from his 2nd year (his first full year starting) to the year before Owens came along). His yardage totals detail how well he ran, not how much.

2000: 86 [5.38 attempts per game]
2001: 82 [5.13 attempts per game]
2002: 63 (in 10 games) [6.3 attempts per game]
2003: 71 [4.43 attempts per game]

Not a whole lot of difference there. In 2003 he was running for 1 attempt per game less compared to 2000, and in 2002 he was running more than he ever has.

And that stat does not differentiate between DESIGNED RUNNING PLAYS and when a play breaks down and the QB leaves the pocket to escape a pass rush. That's why the RUSHING YARDS are a better indicator because earlier in McNabb's career he was running more DESIGNED RUNNING PLAYS and taking off running more often when he couldn't find an open receiver, maybe his first or second option. Which is why his rushing totals were higher. As he developed into a better pocket passer, he learned to find that second, third and even fourth receiver.

The increased rush attempts is due to his staying in the pocket longer, thus being vulnerable to the pass rush and having to escape. Because he is a fast QB, he is able to escape from the pass rush, get positive yards... hence, more rushing attempts even though there were less designed running plays.

You see? Sava = superior football analysis

This is why you fail.

PWNED

Edit: and 2002 needs to be taken with a grain of salt because it's only 10 games... not a full season... but regardless... even his rushing attempts steadily went down... FURTHER DEFEATING YOUR ARGUMENT

[Sava]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


My argument is that he did not run less until Owens got to the team (the rushing attempts dropped to almost half of what it was). It was Owens who helped him mature into an elite passer. Perhaps he will build on those lesson when Owens is gone, but it'll be tougher.

And I've already proven this to be wrong. McNabb's development into a pocket passer was a process that is easily recognizeable over the course of at least 2 years before Owens got to the Eagles.

Yes, Owens presence made McNabb better. DUH!!!

But Owens arriving in Philly didn't change McNabb's approach to the QB position overnight. It was part of the maturation process that took YEARS.

I guess you really haven't been paying attention to McNabb before 2004.

[Imran Siddiqui]

And that stat does not differentiate between DESIGNED RUNNING PLAYS and when a play breaks down and the QB leaves the pocket to escape a pass rush. That's why the RUSHING YARDS are a better indicator because earlier in McNabb's career he was running more DESIGNED RUNNING PLAYS and taking off running more often when he couldn't find an open receiver, maybe his first or second option. Which is why his rushing totals were higher. As he developed into a better pocket passer, he learned to find that second, third and even fourth receiver.

The increased rush attempts is due to his staying in the pocket longer, thus being vulnerable to the pass rush and having to escape. Because he is a fast QB, he is able to escape from the pass rush, get positive yards... hence, more rushing attempts even though there were less designed running plays.

BULLLLLSHIIIT!

It's easy to say "Designed Running Plays" when no one has measured the number of designed running plays per regular running plays. You can claim it all you want and no one can find stats showing the truth or untruth of that statement.

Basically you are making **** up, seeing if anything sticks.

Oh, and btw, in 2002, the year he had his highest passer rating before Owens, if you took his rushing yards and extrapolated them to a 16 game season, it would have been almost exactly the same as his 2000 rushing yard total.

Explain that. What, Andy Reid decided the Eagles needed more "designed running plays" by his QB in 2002, even though he was passing better?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Sava
And I've already proven this to be wrong. McNabb's development into a pocket passer was a process that is easily recognizeable over the course of at least 2 years before Owens got to the Eagles.

... contrary to the statistics... ie, because Sava just pulled this notion out of his ass.

[Sava]

All the numbers are against you Imran... you can go back and watch all the games if you want and pay special attention to McNabb's play.

I don't know what else to say. I'm not going to waste any more time arguing something that is very obvious.

But just know, I've already copied and pasted your posts into my "Imran's Nuggets of Football Wisdom" text file.

I even linked this thread to a couple of my buddies.

My sister's fiance made some comments about your "arguments", but I can't repeat them here.