Boards are slow....hum wonder why? Losers!!

[TheAnalyst]

Eh. Stuff like that balances out over the course of a season. I can't remember which site it was but they focused on adjusting interceptions for blame, dropped ints, etc, and it turns out most QBs deserved to have more interceptions than not.

The year Eli had 25 INTs, we counted on this board, that 10 were in fact tipped off his WRs hands. No one remembers that though and were quick to blame Eli for all those INTs. I remember one game he had 3 INTs and should of had 0.

Of those 5 INTs Romo threw, Id say he threw 3 bad ones. The one Ogletree should of caught. And the other was Dez running a bad route, which he seems to do alot of.

[Ntegrase96]

The year Eli had 25 INTs, we counted on this board, that 10 were in fact tipped off his WRs hands. No one remembers that though and were quick to blame Eli for all those INTs. I remember one game he had 3 INTs and should of had 0.

Of those 5 INTs Romo threw, Id say he threw 3 bad ones. The one Ogletree should of caught. And the other was Dez running a bad route, which he seems to do alot of.

Right, well while there were interceptions that were clearly not Eli's fault, what about the ones he got away with? What about the balls Eli threw that should have been intercepted that year?

In 2010, Eli's interception percentage (in contrast to attempts) was 4.4%. When you take the passes into consideration that were Eli's fault and 'should have been interceptions', Eli's interception percentage dropped a measly 0.1 percent.

Meaning while there may have been 10 tipped interceptions that inflated his actual overall int total to 25, he threw enough bad passes to where he should have had at least 23, maybe 24 ints anyway.

[miked1958]

Right, well while there were interceptions that were clearly not Eli's fault, what about the ones he got away with? What about the balls Eli threw that should have been intercepted that year?

In 2010, Eli's interception percentage (in contrast to attempts) was 4.4%. When you take the passes into consideration that were Eli's fault and 'should have been interceptions', Eli's interception percentage dropped a measly 0.1 percent.

Meaning while there may have been 10 tipped interceptions that inflated his actual overall int total to 25, he threw enough bad passes to where he should have had at least 23, maybe 24 ints anyway.

agreed. but if you are going to point that out then be fair about it and also include all the TD passes and just regular passes that were thrown Perfectly and dropped

[Ntegrase96]

agreed. but if you are going to point that out then be fair about it and also include all the TD passes and just regular passes that were thrown Perfectly and dropped

Dropped TDs don't correlate with int%, which is just the interceptions divided by number of attempts (not completions) multiplied by 100.

It would be interesting to see what kind of results we'd get if someone adjusted passing TDs for dropped TDs and TDs that clearly were the work of the receiver (IE: WR ripping the ball away from the hands of the defender, or a 10 yard pass taken 60+ yards by the athleticism of the receiver).

[Rusty192]

Don't let it bother you. Here in the smack talk, people are quick to read, quicker to respond but slow to understand. So just like any other forum, but of course it's easier to jump to conclusions because there are clear cut good guys (giants fans) and bad guys (Cowboys/Eagles fans and Rodgers12).

We're all a little guilty.

What do we have to understand exactly? It's a flippin' smack talk forum. You talk trash with other fans to make things interesting. Nobody was getting nasty. This isn't rant N' rave. So if Mr. Sly is starting a thread trying to be "lighthearted" then maybe he can take a little "lighthearted" smacktalk back.

He makes a thread jeering us after a crushing loss that ripped our hearts out. But we cant jab the Cowboys because he meant it in fun? Talk about sensitive.

[Ntegrase96]

What do we have to understand exactly? It's a flippin' smack talk forum. You talk trash with other fans to make things interesting. Nobody was getting nasty. This isn't rant N' rave. So if Mr. Sly is starting a thread trying to be "lighthearted" then maybe he can take a little "lighthearted" smacktalk back.

He makes a thread jeering us after a crushing loss that ripped our hearts out. But we cant jab the Cowboys because he meant it in fun? Talk about sensitive.

eh, fair enough

[FIFTY6G-MAN]

Don't let it bother you. Here in the smack talk, people are quick to read, quicker to respond but slow to understand. So just like any other forum, but of course it's easier to jump to conclusions because there are clear cut good guys (giants fans) and bad guys (Cowboys/Eagles fans and Rodgers12).

We're all a little guilty.

That made me almost spit my drink out!! Good one Nt!! I needed that.

[SlyFoxx]

Why don't you just admit that you made this thread prematurely in anticipation that your Cowturds would win this week? Now you are just trying to save face because you look like an idiot considering how badly your team was beaten.

Did you bother to read post #3 in this thread?

[BuffyBlueII]

Funny when folks get all sensitive in smacktalk. It is almost as funny as the romosexual throwing 5 INTs in one game.

[ShakeandBake]

Did you bother to read post #3 in this thread?

Did you forget what you wrote in post #8 of this thread?