New interception stat
-
I thought this was an interesting way to look at how much interceptions hurt you....
-
Yea, well for the Browns it is the difference between being 1-4 or perhaps being 4-1 or at least 3-2.
-
Formerly Stone said:
If you're going to wipe out the turnovers by the Browns don't you also have to wipe out the opponents turnovers?Not necessary. It does not work like algebra. It is upto your team to make sure that they do not throw a pick six just like it is upto your team to make sure they dont commit false start and other penalties. In close games such mistakes can cost the game. If Seneca Wallace did not throw a pick 6, then the Browns would have handed KC their first loss. I know the Kansas City defense has improved a lot but I dont their offense was good enough to win. The interception essentially won the game for them.
-
I think that you're slightly missing a point here. This exercise doesn't say that one QB's interceptions are more hurtful to his team in terms of wins and losses, only in how much of a point swing they account for. When you're in close games like the Browns have been, Delhomme's 14.7 or Seneca's 6.2 points lost equal losses of games whereas Eli Manning's or Aaron Rodgers' values may not.
-
Formerly Stone said:
I understand that but regardless of the statistics of how harmful a missed two foot putt is you look like a whining fool if you make statements like "if I hadn't missed those three two footers, I would have won"Every close game ever played in the NFL is loaded with little things that if you hadn't screwed up you could have won.
That's certainly true. Every NFL game comes down to five plays (or so I was told). If you think about it people love to fixate on this play and that play and how "if this...then that". Annoys me to hell. There are reasons and there are excuses and while I certainly like analyzing the former....I truly can't stand the latter.
-
Formerly Stone said:
The Browns are -2 in turnover differential, not a big deal. If you're going to wipe out the turnovers by the Browns don't you also have to wipe out the opponents turnovers? Or are you just looking at excuses?how many of the turnovers we recovered were we able to score on AND if we scored was it a touchdown. now a interception by the opponent's defense leading to an immediate touchdown is different don't you think?
-
It isn't worth arguing. If we had a couple of defensive pick sixs for tds late in the game the stealer fans would be saying we were lucky and aren't as good as our record.
-
Formerly Stone said:
The Browns are -2 in turnover differential, not a big deal. If you're going to wipe out the turnovers by the Browns don't you also have to wipe out the opponents turnovers? Or are you just looking at excuses?how many of the turnovers we recovered were we able to score on AND if we scored was it a touchdown. now a interception by the opponent's defense leading to an immediate touchdown is different don't you think?
how many of the turnovers we recovered were we able to score on AND if we scored was it a touchdown. now a interception by the opponent's defense leading to an immediate touchdown is different don't you think?
OK, for fun (and running out of DVR space) I just rewatched the Browns Bengals game. Turnovers most definitely won us that game. But as I've said for years concerning football, I'd rather be lucky than good.
To win it all sometimes you need a little of both- like that Giants miracle catch off the helmet to beat the Patsies in the Super Bowl.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login