What Vegas and the National Media is not talking about

[*bfine32*]

(08-29-2022, 11:16 AM)fredtoast Wrote: You are doing nothing here but playing with semantics.  I can use any rhetorical style I wish to tell someone I disagree with them and it will not be a personal attack unless I somehow insult their character, morals, integrity or something like that.

You insulted his intelligence by telling him he didn't know the definition of a word. Instead of disagreeing with his POV. It's from the troll playbook:

Dismissive, condescending tone:




You've devolved into nothing more than a troll. Now that's not a personal attack; I just disagree with the notion that you're not a troll. 

[*PhilHos*]

(08-29-2022, 04:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes I can when I post facts to back it up.

It has not happened in 4 years.

It had not happened in the last 136 attempts.

It almost never happens.  Even among the most skilled and best coached players in the entire league.

And that is exactly how we know luck was involved.

First off, you haven't posted facts. You posted stats. And we're only taking your word that your stat is correct. So, before I continue accepting your word as fact, please kindly post your evidence to back up your stat. Thank you.

Secondly,  I already asked (which you never addressed, again proving you lied when you claimed you replied to all arguments) how many of those 3rd and 25+ pass attempts were legitimate attempts to pick up the first down. I would wager very little. I bet you most of those were thrown short of the 1st down in an attempt to have the receiver either pick up the first down using some moves (which you would still probably say he was lucky) or just get some positive yardage to help the kicker or punter. 

Lastly, again, rarity does not equal luck. Luck is literally defined as "success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one's own actions". Again, a skillful QB throwing a pass he has completed many times to a receiver who has caught said completions many times is the exact OPPOSITE of luck. 

(08-29-2022, 04:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No it is not.  That is a complete false equivalency.  There have been hundreds of game winning FGs and TDs over the last 4 years, but only ONE conversion of a 3rd-and-25+.

And how many prior to the last 4 years? The NFL has been around since 1920. So, I'd be very surprised if this was the ONLY time a 3rd and 25+ was converted.

But, again, the pass itself was not luck. It was a pass Burrow has made quite a few times last season. Saying it was lucky because it was on a 3rd and 27 is like saying that Chase's first TD reception was lucky because it occurred at 1:37 pm (I don't know when time it officially occurred, btw). It doesn't matter WHEN it happened. It matters WHY it happeend. It happened because a skillful QB threw a pass he had thrown many times beofre to a skillful WR who had caught many of those passes before.

(08-29-2022, 04:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes, both of those records involved a lot of luck.  That is why the exact same player with the exact same skill level was never able to repeat them.

Yet, according to you, the same QB and the same WR that made the same play multiple times, but this 1 time, it was due to luck. You need to make up your mind. 

[*PhilHos*]

(08-29-2022, 04:19 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So now 2 out of 41 halves is "all the time"?

For the entire season our defense was in the bottom half of the league in both points and yards allowed.  We were 26th in passing yards and 18th in passer rating.

Hey now, I'm just following your example. You're the one ignoring all the long passes Burrow made all season to focus on only 1 and claim it's lucky because it only happened once even though Burrow's made multiple 25+ yard passes all season long.

Similarly, I'm only focused on the Chiefs games wherein both 2nd halves the defense played outstanding in stymieing one of the league's top offense.

So, do you want to focus on only the limited situation in each argument? Or do you want to focus on what was done all season long?

[*PhilHos*]

(08-29-2022, 04:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If "perfect execution" just happens once every 4 years despite the greatest players and coaches striving to attain it over a hundred times then the Bengals were lucky to get "perfect execution".

You can't try to win an argument just making up new definitions for the meaning of a word.  If converting a 3rd-and-25 was all based on skill and coaching then it would happen a lot more often when the greatest coaches and most skilled players attempt it.

For a perfect example, see fredtoast try to re-define the word 'luck' to mean 'rare'. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(08-29-2022, 03:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You do not list EVERYTHING he said.  But even your selective editing left in this stuff









Watch the video yourself.  Bengals D made some plays.  Mahomes played terrible the second half.  Often had open receivers and running lanes.  Just made a lot of bad decisions.

I would suggest reading your own sig. And then pondering. 

[fredtoast]

(08-29-2022, 05:21 PM)PhilHos Wrote: For a perfect example, see fredtoast try to re-define the word 'luck' to mean 'rare'. 

Actually "rarity" is the best way to identify luck when you have a large sample set of equal factors. I say that if the most skilled players in the world can accomplish a feat less than one in a hundred times then luck has more to do with it than just skill. 

How do you define/identify "luck"?  Say I show you a video of a 10 year old kid making a full court shot.  What do you look for in that video to detrmin if it was based on luck or skill?

[fredtoast]

(08-29-2022, 05:10 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Hey now, I'm just following your example. You're the one ignoring all the long passes Burrow made all season to focus on only 1 and claim it's lucky because it only happened once even though Burrow's made multiple 25+ yard passes all season long.

You are the one ignoring the FACTS that show that you can't compare every long pass to long passes completed against a defense facing a 3rd-and-25.

I have posted the numbers many times.  Why are you ignoring them?  Maybe this will help.

Completions of 25+ yards over the last 4 NFL seasons

.............................total......... on 3rd-and-25+
Mahomes............... 157......... 0 (5 attempts)
Brady..................... 146......... 0 (5)
Rodgers................. 145......... 0 (7)
Wilson................... 134.......... 0 (3)
Carr....................... 134.......... 0 (5)
Cousins.................. 131......... 0 (6)
Goff....................... 121......... 0 (3)
Stafford................. 119.......... 0 (2)
Ryan..................... 117........... 0 (2)
Mayfield................. 106......... 0 (2)
Prescott................. 105......... 0 (3)
Watson.................. 105......... 0 (2)
Allen...................... 104......... 0 (5)
Wentz....................  96.......... 0 (2)
Rivers....................  95.......... 0 (3)


Get it nnow?  You can't compare all long completions to completions against a team defending a 3rd-and-25.

[Bengalholic]

(08-29-2022, 06:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You are the one ignoring the FACTS that show that you can't compare every long pass to long passes completed against a defense facing a 3rd-and-25.

I have posted the numbers many times.  Why are you ignoring them?  Maybe this will help.

Completions of 25+ yards over the last 4 NFL seasons

.............................total......... on 3rd-and-25+
Mahomes............... 157......... 0 (5 attempts)
Brady..................... 146......... 0 (5)
Rodgers................. 145......... 0 (7)
Wilson................... 134.......... 0 (3)
Carr....................... 134.......... 0 (5)
Cousins.................. 131......... 0 (6)
Goff....................... 121......... 0 (3)
Stafford................. 119.......... 0 (2)
Ryan..................... 117........... 0 (2)
Mayfield................. 106......... 0 (2)
Prescott................. 105......... 0 (3)
Watson.................. 105......... 0 (2)
Allen...................... 104......... 0 (5)
Wentz....................  96.......... 0 (2)
Rivers....................  95.......... 0 (3)


Get it nnow?  You can't compare all long completions to completions against a team defending a 3rd-and-25.

Yeah, converting a 3rd and 27 with a great pass and great catch in a critical situation was truly an outstanding feat. 

Why can't you just admit that it was a great play with great execution...instead of going to these extremes to discredit it?

[Nepa]

(08-29-2022, 06:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually "rarity" is the best way to identify luck when you have a large sample set of equal factors. I say that if the most skilled players in the world can accomplish a feat less than one in a hundred times then luck has more to do with it than just skill. 

How do you define/identify "luck"?  Say I show you a video of a 10 year old kid making a full court shot.  What do you look for in that video to detrmin if it was based on luck or skill?

I guess some may define luck as rarity. But I think most people think of luck as something involving chance more so than one's own actions. For example, a fumble that bounces right back up to the person who fumbled the ball or winning a coin toss in overtime. Maybe an official that missed a call because a bug flew in his eye.  I don't think most would call luck catching a long pass that the QB and WR practiced and called the play.

Oh, no. I hope I didn't get myself into this conversation.

[fredtoast]

(08-29-2022, 04:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You insulted his intelligence by telling him he didn't know the definition of a word. Instead of disagreeing with his POV. It's from the troll playbook:

Semantics do not make a personal attack.  It is impossible to disagree with a person without claiming that they are wrong and you are correct.  So based on your own definition you are a troll everytime you disagree with someone.

It is not a personal attack unless you make a comment about a person's character, morals, integrity, etc. 

Like this.

(08-29-2022, 04:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You've devolved into nothing more than a troll. Now that's not a personal attack; I just disagree with the notion that you're not a troll. 

Calling me a troll is clearly a personal attack.  You just can't process the logic involved to understand this.  What makes a person a troll is not the "disagreement".   Every debate here involves a disagreement.  What makes a person a troll is the "subject of the disagreement".  In this case the subject, i.e "me being a troll" is directly related to my personality and integrity.  But "the definition of fluke" has nothing to do with anyone's character, integrity, or personality. 

[fredtoast]

(08-29-2022, 07:11 PM)Nepa Wrote:   I don't think most would call luck catching a long pass that the QB and WR practiced and called the play.

You are falling into the same trap as Philos.

You are ignoring the HUGE difference between "Completing a pass over 25 yards" and "completing a pass over 25 yards against a defense designed to stop a third-and-25".

the facts prove I am correct.  If it was just about skill then the best QBs in the league would be able to do it more often.  Therefore there is a good bit of luck involved.

[Bengalfan4life27c]

I think you are not understanding fluke Fred. Ravens VS Lions is an example Tucker's record setting FG wasn't a fluke. The official missing the delay of game was.

[Nepa]

(08-29-2022, 07:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: the facts prove I am correct.  

Only if you get to define the terminology. Not if one defines luck as good or bad things that happen by chance rather than through one's own actions. 

So, it really comes down to how one defines the terms. I think some posters would use the term "good fortune" for what you are calling luck, since good fortune means adding a level of control that is not found in the term luck. The pass from Burrow to Chase was fortunate, but I would not say it was lucky, because it wasn't just random chance that they completed the play; they had practiced the play over and over. It involved talent and a level of control, more so than a lucky roll of a dice or flip of a coin or a weird bounce of a prolate-spheroid-shaped football.

At any point, we might as well close this discussion, since you, Fred, and other posters (including myself) define things differently.

[fredtoast]

(08-29-2022, 07:31 PM)Bengalfan4life27c Wrote: Tucker's record setting FG wasn't a fluke.

Yes it was.

If it wasn't then Harbaugh would be attempting 60+ yd FGs all the time.  But even Justin Tucker is only 2-6 from that distance.

[Soonerpeace]

The discussion over a third and 25 conversion is so alien to the real point. Converting a third and 25 with Tom Brady to Jerry Rice in his prime is long odds. The discussion of the Bengals lucking out or there season being labeled a fluke by Fredtoast is silly. Their late season run was filled with several playoff road games, strong underdogs, young team with zero experience and they delivered time after time. Can the season get here soon enough so Fredtoast can criticize the awful head coach and staff?

[*bengalfan74*]

(08-29-2022, 08:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes it was.

If it wasn't then Harbaugh would be attempting 60+ yd FGs all the time.  But even Justin Tucker is only 2-6 from that distance.

Fred a fluke to me would be on a 3rd and 27 play. The JB trying to hit the TE on a seam route 15 yards downfield. The ball being tipped and batted around by 4 different defenders and bouncing 10 yards further downfield right into Chase's arms for the first.

It astounds me that you're still calling a perfectly executed play by two of the best in the business a fluke play. 

[Bengalholic]

(08-29-2022, 07:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You are falling into the same trap as Philos.

You are ignoring the HUGE difference between "Completing a pass over 25 yards" and "completing a pass over 25 yards against a defense designed to stop a third-and-25".

the facts prove I am correct.  If it was just about skill then the best QBs in the league would be able to do it more often.  Therefore there is a good bit of luck involved.

You're speaking in generalities with 3rd and 25+ attempts...instead of looking at the specific situation with the Bengals and how / why it happened the way it did.

The Chiefs had brought heavy blitzes earlier in the game and got roasted. Chase was obliterating their secondary. When Burrow goes to the line, he sees they're bringing the heat and decisively calls for another Chase go ball. Burrow takes the snap, gets rid of ball quickly, perfect placement. Chase quick outside release, gets to the sideline, makes a great catch. 

Forget about all the other situations, where was the 'luck' in this specific situation...as opposed to great recognition and execution?

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(08-29-2022, 04:24 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: Yep, according to fred's logic...he forgot how to play football in the 2nd half. 

Seriously, this has been some of the worst and most asinine arguments I've ever seen in JN. 

I think it is the worst and that is saying something.

[fredtoast]

(08-29-2022, 08:39 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote:  Converting a third and 25 with Tom Brady to Jerry Rice in his prime is long odds. 

Thank god someone finally has the guts to admit it.

If it was just about talent then guys like Rodgers and Brady would be converting these throws.  But it isn't.  Teams defending a third and 25 play differently.  I guess you could say the "luck" involved in this specific play was the Chiefs blitzing and leaving Chase in single coverage.

But just like none of you would be able to point to the "luck" involved in a ten-year-old making a perfect 60 foot shot on a basketball court ("It's just perfect execution.  No luck involved. Derp.") the fact that it almost never happens is proof that there is more involved than just skill.  If it was just skill then the most skilled players would be successful at it.  But they are not.

[*rfaulk34*]

(08-29-2022, 07:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You are falling into the same trap as Philos.

You are ignoring the HUGE difference between "Completing a pass over 25 yards" and "completing a pass over 25 yards against a defense designed to stop a third-and-25".

the facts prove I am correct.  If it was just about skill then the best QBs in the league would be able to do it more often.  Therefore there is a good bit of luck involved.

A defense choosing to zero blitz and give one of the top WRs in the NFL one on one coverage, with a QB who leads the league in comp% is not luck. It's a bad decision.