You think applying obscure statistical parameters to more favorably judge one player, while looking at all total numbers for all other players, is rational. That says everything that needs to be said about you.

quote:
no. they're facts

No, facts are objective. Your data is not objective. Therefore, it cannot be "facts"

quote:
link?

You want me to link your subjective nonsense that doesn't actually exist? How is anyone supposed to do that?

quote:
good grief. i get the impression you don't watch the games.

Then prove me wrong. Go through and tell us exactly, by the minute and second on your he clock, when ensminger starts and stops "pushing". And also tell us exactly what criteria you are using to determine when said "pushing" has started and stopped.

quote:
here's where you're wrong. not only did i reference burrow's qbr, but i also showed how when lsu is actually mixing it up/throwing downfield, you know, those things that characterize an offense that's trying, burrow is about as good as anybody, especially given the competition

Here's where you wrong. You posted this drivel that only deals with burrow in response to a comment I made about you only applying parameters to burrow, and no other players. And you somehow think this isn't proving my point.

quote:
false

That word doesn't mean what you think it means. Neither does rational.

quote:
i used "commonly accepted stats." you just don't want to read between the lines, i.e. the 2nd half when lsu is leading big

If that's so commonly accepted, link me to where else I can find a statistical breakdown of quarterbacks in the 2nd half when their team is leading big.

Can't do it? That's ok. Just provide that data for every other quarterback then. Should be just a few mouse clicks away since it's so commonly accepted.

quote:
what the frick? have you EVER watched football? analysts do this ALL THE TIME

Then show me. Give us the recompiled stats for Haskins, tua, Murray, Grier, etc. again, should be very easy if it happens ALL THE TIME

quote:
haven't gotten offended one time. although i did call out your ridiculous response to a facile correlation

You're in here claiming people don't watch football because they are balking at your ridiculous burrow-only stats. If that's not offended then what is it?

quote:
you're making this WAY more difficult than it really is.

You're the moron that said those things were covered in strength of record.

Also, this from the guy that insists on recompiling stats based on ridiculous parameters only for burrow in an attempt to make him look good. Irony.

quote:
the point i was making is that there were 2 games against lesser competition when lsu had a big lead and CLEARLY changed the playcalling. i realize you don't want to accept this but, it affects the passing stats. PLOT TWIST

1. So once again, go through and do recompiled stats for every other quarterback against lesser competition if you want that data to be relevant.

2. So conservative playcalling somehow explains burrow completing 50% of his passes against an fcs school? Let me guess, more "facts" from you right?

quote:
moreover, when lsu plays a stronger opponent and the game is closer, the stats seem to be better. and burrow's stats are improving in comparison with other qb's. WHO KNEW?

I won't even use the Miami game.

Lsu played a top 10 team on the road. The game was close the entire time. Burrow completed 15-34, 44% of his passes for 249 yards and 1 touchdown, 115.3 rating. According to you this is showing improvement.

Ohio st played a top 10 team on the road. The game was close the entire time. Haskins completed 22-39, 54% of his passes for 270 yards and 3 td, 134.8 rating. According to you multiple times in this thread, this was a poor showing for Haskins.

quote:
can't believe how much effort you are putting into this. it's like trying to explain why the sky is blue to a kid

Again, the guy having to go through and recompile stats to try to make burrow look good is talking about other people putting in too much effort. Again, irony.