- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 7/31/15 at 10:29 am to BCS Statmaster
quote:
You are the one taking issue with ESPN ... your position not mine. Defend it.
You brought the opening argument to use ESPN QBR despite the fact that every other statistical analysis uses NCAA Quarterback Rating... I argued that it's unreliable, impossible to replicate, and pointed out obvious flaws, such as discrepancies between common opponents and adjustments made compared to defensive passing efficiency... you have yet to address these arguments or counter with arguments of your own.
I'd say the position is yours to defend.
Posted on 7/31/15 at 10:31 am to chilge1
quote:
I argued that it's unreliable
Why
Posted on 7/31/15 at 10:34 am to BCS Statmaster
quote:
What about the equation or data collection is subjective
How about the fact that neither the equation or the method of data collection is made available to the public, and that the "formula" that they use has allegedly undergone multiple changes since it was first incorporated?
Posted on 7/31/15 at 10:34 am to BCS Statmaster
quote:He has defended his position.quote:You are the one taking issue with ESPN ... your position not mine. Defend it.
Enlighten me
REPEATEDLY.
And he's done a DAMN good job of explaining that the ESPN QBR is made-up gobbledygook that NO ONE outside of ESPN uses or can replicate.
You know what, I'm going to make up a statistic. I'm going to call it QBC. It stands for QB Color.
Jordan Jefferson = #461D7C (Hexadecimal)
Jarrett Lee = #FDD023 (Hexadecimal)
Now, prove to me that my QBCs for Jefferson and Lee are in any way inaccurate or factually incorrect.
Posted on 7/31/15 at 10:40 am to Salviati
quote:
done a DAMN good job of explaining that the ESPN QBR is made-up gobbledygook
gobbledygook/subjective/unreliable ... must have some basis ...
Posted on 7/31/15 at 10:42 am to Makinbacon
quote:
Jeff had 100 rushing on 5 attempts.
83 of that coming on one busted play first play of game.
That means rest of game he 30 yards passing and 4 rushes for 17 yards.
Plus two ints.
Here were Lee's stats entering the 4th quarter...
6/10 58 yards
2 car, -11 rushing
This included an 18 yard pass on 3rd&21
On the first drive of the 4th, he completed 2 passes for 56 yards before throwing an interception in the endzone.
He then engineered a 16 play, 69 yard TD drive, the first of the game since Jefferson's 83 yard run... we had shite QB play from both positions for the majority of the game.
Posted on 7/31/15 at 10:43 am to BCS Statmaster
quote:
gobbledygook/subjective/unreliable ... must have some basis ..
Why don't you tell us what that basis is, so we can shut up about it... Statmaster?
Unless, of course
quote:
Clearly, you have blind faith in ESPN. You obviously believe them to be infallible. You must believe that they are incapable of making a typographical mistake, computational mistake, or factual error.
This post was edited on 7/31/15 at 10:47 am
Posted on 7/31/15 at 10:45 am to BCS Statmaster
quote:First Principles, BCS Statmaster.quote:gobbledygook/subjective/unreliable ... must have some basis ...
done a DAMN good job of explaining that the ESPN QBR is made-up gobbledygook
You brought it up. You defend it.
You present the source collection that supplies the analysis for the ESPN QBR.
You present the equation by which the analysis for the ESPN QBR is conducted.
You brought up the ESPN QBR. You defend it.
Posted on 7/31/15 at 10:48 am to chilge1
quote:
you tell us what that basis is
Your statement(s) emphatically imply ESPN flaws, not for me to defend.
Posted on 7/31/15 at 10:51 am to Salviati
quote:
You present the source collection
You disagreed with ESPN ... simply want to know why
Posted on 7/31/15 at 10:55 am to BCS Statmaster
quote:No, no, no, no.quote:Your statement(s) emphatically imply ESPN flaws, not for me to defend.
you tell us what that basis is
Your statement emphatically implies that ESPN is flawless. You brought it up. It's ALL for you to defend.
You present the source collection that supplies the analysis for the ESPN QBR.
You present the equation by which the analysis for the ESPN QBR is conducted.
First Principles, BCS Statmaster.
You brought up the ESPN QBR. You defend it.
Posted on 7/31/15 at 10:59 am to Salviati
quote:
No, no, no, no.
Yes Yes ... why is ESPN wrong?
Posted on 7/31/15 at 11:01 am to Salviati
quote:
Your statement emphatically implies that ESPN is flawless. You brought it up.
no he didnt. Liar.
quote:
First Principles, BCS Statmaster.
You brought up the ESPN QBR. You defend it.
Actually first principles refers to going back to what you know to be true. it's a method of problem solving and actually has very little to do with the current debate.
In reality, you claimed it was wrong to use ESPN QBR. Therefore YOU must prove why it is wrong to use ESPN QBR. If it is easy to dismiss, you should surely be able to do so in a logical thoughtful way.
You claimed it was wrong to use it, so why, why is it wrong.
Posted on 7/31/15 at 11:05 am to BCS Statmaster
quote:First, please tell me the equation by which you or I or anyone can determine the ESPN QBR? I mean, we can all verify it, right?quote:You disagreed with ESPN ... simply want to know why
You present the source collection
Second, the ESPN QBR that you provided includes the 2011 post-season, two games in which Lee did not have stats. The SECCG and BCSCG are different from the regular season in quality and kind. You can't possibly be suggesting that those two games should be included in a comparison between Jefferson and Lee, can you?!?!
SEC Regular Season Games
Jefferson's performance in the GOTC and against Arkansas were very good.
His performance in the second half of the SECCG was an integral part of that victory. Tyrann Mathieu sparked the team and played amazingly, but Jefferson led the team to FOUR offensive TDs.
And you can't reasonably blame Jefferson for the loss in the BCSCG. He completed almost 65% of his passes. There are at least six reasons why LSU lost the BCSCG:
1. LSU did not run well against top five defenses. In the first half of the SECCG, LSUs' RBs gained 21 yards on 9 attempts. That's 2.3 YPC. On one possession, Jefferson completed a 9 yard pass on first down. LSU's RBs ran the ball twice and could not get the first down. The first half of the SECCG sucked for the entire LSU offense. During the BCSCG, LSU's RBs gained 24 yards for the whole game.
The problem with the BCSCG and the first half of the SECCG is that LSU's offense did not work against those defenses. The problem was the offensive line. For the BCSCG, the O-line couldn’t move the Bama D-line, and they couldn’t hold them back either. There was no run game, and there was no time to pass.
In nearly every series of the BCSCG, the offense line failed to execute on at least one play. Bama had the best defense in college football. It would have been difficult to beat Bama unless they made a costly mistake or the offense executed at a very high level.
2. The GOTC loss motivated Bama to better prepare for and play the NC game. Bama was playing for redemption. Bama was very well-prepared for the game. The Bama defense was fully prepared to shut down the option. The Bama defense was fully prepared to shut down LSU's deep threat.
3. Bama lost the GOTC with their prior offensive strategy, so they were forced to abandon it. Bama took greater risks to win the BCCG. The Bama offense went in a completely different direction than it had all season. Bama relied on McCarron and passing rather than Richardson and rushing to move the ball. Saban took the ball out of Richardson’s hands and made McCarron win the game. Bama threw on nearly every first down. It was a risky strategy, but what did Bama have to lose? They had already lost to LSU trying to run the ball. McCarron had a terrific night; thus, the strategy worked.
4. Even though Bama had flipped its offensive strategy, it does not necessarily mean that LSU should have inserted Lee at any point in the NC game. Hindsight is always 20/20, and we know now that LSU’s plan did not work. However, LSU trailed Arkansas 14-0 in the second quarter. The offense came around in the second quarter, and LSU blew out Arkansas. LSU trailed Georgia 10-0 at the half in the SECCG. The offense was atrocious the first half but came around in the second half, and LSU blew out Georgia. With a few dozen plays left, it was not unreasonable for Miles to go with the strategy that worked so well in the two previous games. It was at least as reasonable as trying a QB that was the antithesis of the ideal QB to use against Bama.
CONTINUED
Posted on 7/31/15 at 11:05 am to BCS Statmaster
CONTINUED
5. Jefferson was the right choice for the entire game. Lee would have been ineffective. Jefferson in the pocket slowed down the Bama rush because Bama used a mush rush to contain Jefferson and prevent him from running. It’s the same idea LSU used against Manziel to keep him from breaking off long runs. Slow the rush and contain the QB. Bama would not have used a mush rush against Lee because Lee is no threat to run.
So if Miles put in Lee, there’s still no run game, and now there is even less time to pass. If there is one thing Bama feasted on, it was immobile pocket passers. Lee’s historic numbers against Bama confirm this fact. His QB Rating against Bama could fit in a shoe box.
Lee was efficient, but not prolific.
During 2011, "efficient" is the single word that defined Lee. You'll be hard pressed to find a post about Lee without the word "efficient" just a few words away. The thing about being defined as “efficient” is that it means that you aren’t a prolific passer; you don’t throw it a lot. In fact, it typically means that the offense is run-oriented and passes infrequently. Prior to the GOTC, Lee averaged less than 20 passes per game. Lee had only one game in 2011 in which he threw for more than 200 yards: 213 yards against Mississippi State. Lee wasn’t a prolific passer. He was efficient.
Efficient does not work when you can’t run.
Efficient works when your team can run the ball effectively. Efficient means that the defense is focused on stopping the run. Efficient means that the defense is not expecting a pass. Efficient means that you have time to throw because the defense is not focused on stopping the pass. Efficient does not work when you aren’t running well. Efficient does not work when your line can’t block. Bama’s D was suffocating that night. Bama would have killed Lee.
Jefferson was a better QB than Lee.
Jefferson's three regular season starts in 2011 were the three best offensive games of the season.
It wasn't that one of Jefferson's games was better than one of Lee's games. It wasn't that the average of Jefferson's three starts was better than the average of Lee's starts. Every regular season game that Jefferson started was better than every regular season game that Lee started.
LSU's best rushing game happened when Jefferson started.
LSU's best total offense game happened when Jefferson started.
LSU's best completion percentage game happened when Jefferson started.
In the nine games that Lee started during the regular season, LSU gained over 400 yards just once. In the three games that Jefferson started during the regular season, LSU gained more than 400 yards in every game. Every game.
Jefferson had better regular season passing numbers than Lee.
Compare regular season numbers. Jefferson had better passing numbers than Lee: higher Completion %; higher QB Rating; higher YPA; lower Interception %. And that's not even mentioning how much Jefferson improved the team's rushing attack. LSU rushed for over 250 yards in every game of Jefferson’s three starts.
Lee threw for over 200 yards (213) just once in nine games. Jefferson threw for more than 200 yards (208) once in just three games.
Jefferson completed 100% of his passes against Ole Miss. Lee never completed 100% of his passes in any of his starts, not even against Northwestern State, an FCS school.
In Lee's nine regular season starts, he completed less than 50% of his passes three times. In Jefferson's three starts, he always completed more than 55% of his passes.
Jefferson (2011 Regular Season)
64.3%, 9.34 YPA, 5 TDs, 1 INT, INT% 1.43%, Overall Rating 163.48
Lee (2011 Regular Season)
62.3%, 7.82 YPA, 14 TDs, 3 INTs, INT% 1.80%, Overall Rating 152.04
Post-season numbers cannot be compared. Jefferson played in the Championship games. Lee didn't
Jefferson was more efficient than Lee
From the moment that Jefferson threw his first pass in the Florida game in 2011, he had a higher QB Rating than Lee. Jefferson had a better efficiency rating than Lee, and that better efficiency continued for the rest of the regular season. That's right, from his first pass until the end of the regular season, Jefferson was more efficient than Lee.
So when folks say that Lee was an efficient QB, the "most efficient" QB in the SEC or in the nation, at no point during the regular season, from the time Jefferson threw his first pass until the end of the regular season, was Lee more efficient than Jefferson.
6. LSU should not have been playing Bama. LSU beat Bama at their house in the Game of the Century. You play the hand you’re dealt, but it was a raw deal.
5. Jefferson was the right choice for the entire game. Lee would have been ineffective. Jefferson in the pocket slowed down the Bama rush because Bama used a mush rush to contain Jefferson and prevent him from running. It’s the same idea LSU used against Manziel to keep him from breaking off long runs. Slow the rush and contain the QB. Bama would not have used a mush rush against Lee because Lee is no threat to run.
So if Miles put in Lee, there’s still no run game, and now there is even less time to pass. If there is one thing Bama feasted on, it was immobile pocket passers. Lee’s historic numbers against Bama confirm this fact. His QB Rating against Bama could fit in a shoe box.
Lee was efficient, but not prolific.
During 2011, "efficient" is the single word that defined Lee. You'll be hard pressed to find a post about Lee without the word "efficient" just a few words away. The thing about being defined as “efficient” is that it means that you aren’t a prolific passer; you don’t throw it a lot. In fact, it typically means that the offense is run-oriented and passes infrequently. Prior to the GOTC, Lee averaged less than 20 passes per game. Lee had only one game in 2011 in which he threw for more than 200 yards: 213 yards against Mississippi State. Lee wasn’t a prolific passer. He was efficient.
Efficient does not work when you can’t run.
Efficient works when your team can run the ball effectively. Efficient means that the defense is focused on stopping the run. Efficient means that the defense is not expecting a pass. Efficient means that you have time to throw because the defense is not focused on stopping the pass. Efficient does not work when you aren’t running well. Efficient does not work when your line can’t block. Bama’s D was suffocating that night. Bama would have killed Lee.
Jefferson was a better QB than Lee.
Jefferson's three regular season starts in 2011 were the three best offensive games of the season.
It wasn't that one of Jefferson's games was better than one of Lee's games. It wasn't that the average of Jefferson's three starts was better than the average of Lee's starts. Every regular season game that Jefferson started was better than every regular season game that Lee started.
LSU's best rushing game happened when Jefferson started.
LSU's best total offense game happened when Jefferson started.
LSU's best completion percentage game happened when Jefferson started.
In the nine games that Lee started during the regular season, LSU gained over 400 yards just once. In the three games that Jefferson started during the regular season, LSU gained more than 400 yards in every game. Every game.
Jefferson had better regular season passing numbers than Lee.
Compare regular season numbers. Jefferson had better passing numbers than Lee: higher Completion %; higher QB Rating; higher YPA; lower Interception %. And that's not even mentioning how much Jefferson improved the team's rushing attack. LSU rushed for over 250 yards in every game of Jefferson’s three starts.
Lee threw for over 200 yards (213) just once in nine games. Jefferson threw for more than 200 yards (208) once in just three games.
Jefferson completed 100% of his passes against Ole Miss. Lee never completed 100% of his passes in any of his starts, not even against Northwestern State, an FCS school.
In Lee's nine regular season starts, he completed less than 50% of his passes three times. In Jefferson's three starts, he always completed more than 55% of his passes.
Jefferson (2011 Regular Season)
64.3%, 9.34 YPA, 5 TDs, 1 INT, INT% 1.43%, Overall Rating 163.48
Lee (2011 Regular Season)
62.3%, 7.82 YPA, 14 TDs, 3 INTs, INT% 1.80%, Overall Rating 152.04
Post-season numbers cannot be compared. Jefferson played in the Championship games. Lee didn't
Jefferson was more efficient than Lee
From the moment that Jefferson threw his first pass in the Florida game in 2011, he had a higher QB Rating than Lee. Jefferson had a better efficiency rating than Lee, and that better efficiency continued for the rest of the regular season. That's right, from his first pass until the end of the regular season, Jefferson was more efficient than Lee.
So when folks say that Lee was an efficient QB, the "most efficient" QB in the SEC or in the nation, at no point during the regular season, from the time Jefferson threw his first pass until the end of the regular season, was Lee more efficient than Jefferson.
6. LSU should not have been playing Bama. LSU beat Bama at their house in the Game of the Century. You play the hand you’re dealt, but it was a raw deal.
Posted on 7/31/15 at 11:07 am to Salviati
quote:
Second, the ESPN QBR that you provided includes the 2011 post-season, two games in which Lee did not have stats.
lolz.
keep trying, clown.
Posted on 7/31/15 at 11:15 am to Salviati
Thorough, somewhat eloquent ... does not address the ESPN question.
Posted on 7/31/15 at 11:17 am to CptBengal
quote:Yes, he did bring it up.quote:no he didnt. Liar.
Your statement emphatically implies that ESPN is flawless. You brought it up.
quote::sigh:
ctually first principles refers to going back to what you know to be true. it's a method of problem solving and actually has very little to do with the current debate.
What we know to be true in this case is that BCS Statmaster first relied upon the ESPN QBR.
What we also know to be true in this case is that the person who first makes reference to a fact or method of analysis bears the initial burden of defending it.
Finally, what we also know to be true is that the ESPN does not provide any equation or process for how ESPN derives the ESPN QBR. Since it is impossible to prove a negative, the obligation falls on BCS Statmaster doubly to defend the ESPN QBR.
quote:In reality, BCS Statmaster first referenced the ESPN QBR; threfore, HE must defend it. Nevertheless, the ESPN QBR has been repeatedly and credibly attacked in this every thread.
In reality, you claimed it was wrong to use ESPN QBR. Therefore YOU must prove why it is wrong to use ESPN QBR. If it is easy to dismiss, you should surely be able to do so in a logical thoughtful way.
For example:
quote:
Clearly, you have blind faith in ESPN. You obviously believe them to be infallible. You must believe that they are incapable of making a typographical mistake, computational mistake, or factual error.
You clearly must believe these things because you put your blind faith in a made-up number that cannot be verified and that is not used by anyone outside of ESPN.
I apologize for not bowing down to the almighty ESPN. I don't wear a tinfoil hat, but I know that reporters, typists, etc make typographical and computational errors.
And you keep referencing the "number of plays" by Lee and Jefferson as thought that is a key statistic. Please enlighten me as to the qualitative or quantitative impact that the "number of plays" has on the ESPN QBR?
quote:Given that BCS Statmaster bears the burden of defending the ESPN QBR, and given the complete dearth of information about the ESPN QBR, it's been thoroughly discredited in this thread.
No, you're defending a statistic you don't even comprehend... Adjusted QBR...? How is it adjusted? Here are the % changes from Raw to Adjusted QBRs for Lee and Jefferson against teams faced in 2011, listed in descending order of defensive passing ranking..
#1 Bama – 444% increase (JL)– 96.1% increase (JJ)
#1 Bama – 302% increase (JJ)
#4 UGA – 137% increase (JJ)
#11 WVU – 14.4% increase (JL)
#17 Arky – 0.1% increase (JJ)
#27 MSST – 21% increase (JL)
#28 Flor – 3.7% increase (JL) – 3.8% increase (JJ)
#29 Kent – 3.2% increase (JL) – 0% increase (JJ)
#40 Oregon – 47.1% increase (JL)
#48 Tenn – 10.5% increase (JL) – 28.9% increase (JJ)
#55 WKU – 5.8% increase (JJ)
#83 Miss – 0.0% increase (JJ)
#86 Aubn – 6.8% decrease (JL)– 2.1% decrease (JJ)
UR - NWST – 5.8% decrease (JL)
Please explain to me how two quarterbacks, against the same defense, can have their QBR adjusted to such varying degrees.... or how Oregon, who possessed the 40th ranked pass defense in 2011, was adjusted to a greater degree than 5 teams who were more efficient against the pass...
Posted on 7/31/15 at 11:20 am to Salviati
Sal....not sure if you have a job but jesus you got way too much time on your hands there podnuh. 
Page 22 of 36
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News