Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums


FBG Apps Beta Tester
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

790 Excellent

About CalBear

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

12,839 profile views
  1. The angle matters a lot. Note that on this call, the ref is on the inside of the play and Kittle is pushing off with his inside arm; he's looking right at it. If the ref were on the other side of the play where he has to see through both bodies and the arms in between, it probably wouldn't get called. It's similar to the Darrell Jackson play from Super Bowl XL; the ref was standing right behind him, he pushed off with the back hand, and it got called. That play was even less of a push than Kittle's but it was even more visible.
  2. I haven't officiated football but I've officiated basketball and I'll tell you this: The idea that officiating can ever be consistent comes from people who've never tried it. Pass interference is a lot like block/charge in basketball. You have to make a call in the moment. You only have the viewing angle you have, you have to make the call in real time, and the rules are intentionally fuzzy (some contact is allowed). Very clearly, there are plays of the Kittle OPI nature which aren't called. There are other plays which are less egregious which are called, especially against the defense. The fact that officiating is inconsistent is baked into the game; you just have to deal with it.
  3. No, I think that's kind of the consensus. An above-average QB is better than Tom Brady at this point in his career.
  4. Looking only at deep passes: Passes (n=804): 23.6 yards average, 39.35% first downs, 6.55% turnovers, 9.33% TDs. That looks better, but includes only plays where the pass actually was thrown (not sacks).
  5. "You should take a shot" on second and short has been orthodoxy for so long that I'm reflexively suspicious of it. Here's one way to look at it; it would take time to really analyze, but looking at PFR's win probability for first quarter tied games, ball on second and 1 at your own 48, expected points is 2.203; ball on first and 10 at your own 49, expected points is 2.191. Second and 1 at the opponent's 31, expected points 3.589, first and 10 at the 30, 3.577. So it may be slightly advantageous to get nine yards on first down instead of 10 yards, possibly because it gives you the opportunity to have a bigger play on second down. Results of plays on second and 1, ball outside opponent's 10 (1994-2019): Passes (n=3618): 9.8 yards average, 55.61% first downs, 3.54% turnovers (high!), 4.64% sacks, 2.54% TDs. Rushes (n=8476): 4.2 yards average, 78.8% first downs, 0.72% turnovers, 0.76% TDs. So teams are roughly twice as likely to rush on second and one. Rushing is substantially more likely to result in a first down, substantially less likely to result in a negative play, and substantially less likely to result in a big positive play. All of which is fairly intuitive. I am surprised, though, at the big disparity in turnovers; you're almost five times as likely to turn it over when passing rather than rushing on second and one. So you get roughly a three-fold increase in yardage and TD probability in exchange for a five-fold increase in turnover risk. My intuition is that turnovers are so expensive that the tradeoff isn't worth it. But a lot more detailed analysis would need to be done.
  6. One interesting thing about the game is that KC got 8 or 9 yards on first down a lot; five times by my count. So this came up a fair bit. The following plays were mostly conservative.
  7. In passer rating, Kapernick's 2016 was 17/30 among passers with more than 300 attempts, ahead of Rivers, Winston, E.Manning, Wentz, Newton, and Fitzmagic, people who all still had jobs in 2019. His QBR was 21/30, ahead of Tannehill, Wentz, E.Manning, Newton, and Fitzmagic. It wasn't an elite season but it was solidly within NFL starting QB ratings as a passer. Add to that that he was second among QBs in rushing yardage and first in YPC (69/468/2, 6.8 ypc).
  8. Kaepernick's debut was good. I think if Kaepernick had been given the opportunity to have an NFL career that he would have been a good passer. His actual career rate stats are pretty good; among players who were in the first six years of their careers and had at least 1000 attempts from 2011-2016, Kaepernick's passer rating is #5 of 20 (behind Wilson, Cousins, Ryan, and Dalton, and ahead of Luck, Stafford, Tannehill, Newton, Winston, among others). You are asserting that Kapernick's partial 2016, where he had a 90.7 passer rating, 16 TDs and 4 INTs, with 7.2 YPA, is an indication that he was no longer a good passer. I don't see evidence for that assertion. Certainly he did better than many of the QBs starting in the league at that time.
  9. Those are both true statements, but bostonfred's stuff is sillier. I mean, Drew Bledsoe, seriously? Bledsoe's career passer rating is 77.1 and he never had a season over 90. In the only year he led the league in a passing stat other than attempts (4555 yards in 1994), he also led in INTs (27). He never finished better than 7th in YPA. Rivers has led the league in YPA three times. Rivers is definitely closer to Dan Fouts or Warren Moon than to Drew Bledsoe or Matt Stafford.
  10. What is your list of "running QBs" who ever had a passing season early in their careers as good as Jackson's 2019? The answer is, there are maybe zero. Or at most just a handful, most of whom went on to great careers as passers. Making comparisons to QBs who never had good passing seasons is silly and unhelpful.
  11. (For those scoring at home: McNair, 153 starts, 669/3590/37 TD, 5.4 ypc. Young, 143 starts, 722/4239/43 TD, 5.9 ypc. Also 96/594/8 TD, 6.2 ypc in the post-season including leading the team in rushing in the Super Bowl win).
  12. So, how is Steve McNair more of a "running QB" than Steve Young? Forget it, I know the answer.
  13. Kaepernick has career rate stats similar to Andrew Luck. The number of cases when "running QBs" as you have defined them had a passing season as good as Lamar Jackson's just was is, zero. So you have exactly zero antecedents, unless you count Steve Young.
  14. Why is Jackson more likely to be the next Kaepernick than the next Young? (And Kaepernick is out of the league because he's been blackballed, not because he can't play).
  15. Of course. Even if he comes back as an emergency stopgap somewhere he won't be worth starting.