Honest question, are MoF targets more efficient / lead to better outcomes than sideline plays?
As it seems to be highly linked to EPA I assume so.
Honest question, are MoF targets more efficient / lead to better outcomes than sideline plays?
I'm no math guy, but I do know that 6 is 50% more than 4.And you'd be a fool to say that.
Using the statement 50% more is highly misleading. With smaller numbers it doesn't have the same weight as with larger numbers.I'm no math guy, but I do know that 6 is 50% more than 4.
Think you're selling yourself short. Unless you have a calculator.I'm no math guy, but I do know that 6 is 50% more than 4.
but it isn't inaccurate.Using the statement 50% more is highly misleading. With smaller numbers it doesn't have the same weight as with larger numbers.
The accuracy is true, the impact of the statement of "50% more wins" is misleading.but it isn't inaccurate.
4*1.5=???Think you're selling yourself short. Unless you have a calculator.
100% false. Math is math bud. If someones brain cant weigh the difference between 50% more of 8 and 50% more of 4, not my problem.Using the statement 50% more is highly misleading. With smaller numbers it doesn't have the same weight as with larger numbers.
But when one speaks about incremental improvement, it does not matter what your starting point is. It's not math's fault we sucked enough to only get 4 wins. I will ALWAYS take 50% improvement year over year. ALWAYS. Would I prefer to not be starting from 4? Duh. Would I prefer to see 300% improvement? Duh. But 50% is a tangible improvement. I just think your distaste for K9 is clouding your opinion on everything he says.The accuracy is true, the impact of the statement of "50% more wins" is misleading.
Making that statement would be looking at the bright side of failure (2 more wins is 50% more!)
There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. 50 percent more wins sounds great until you tell people that would put us at 6-11. No one wants that. Had we won 8 games, hell yeah folks would want 50 percent more wins for a 12-5 record. Math is math but numbers change greatly in context.100% false. Math is math bud. If someones brain cant weigh the difference between 50% more of 8 and 50% more of 4, not my problem.
Especially when you look at the most favorable home schedule we have had in years.There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. 50 percent more wins sounds great until you tell people that would put us at 6-11. No one wants that. Had we won 8 games, hell yeah folks would want 50 percent more wins for a 12-5 record. Math is math but numbers change greatly in context.
I think the point is that people are pointing at those other franchises’ reset seasons as disasters when ours was 30% worse.There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. 50 percent more wins sounds great until you tell people that would put us at 6-11. No one wants that. Had we won 8 games, hell yeah folks would want 50 percent more wins for a 12-5 record. Math is math but numbers change greatly in context.
If Gannon and his regime only gets a 50% every year from last year, I'll be pretty sour on them after their 9-9 season.But when one speaks about incremental improvement, it does not matter what your starting point is. It's not math's fault we sucked enough to only get 4 wins. I will ALWAYS take 50% improvement year over year. ALWAYS. Would I prefer to not be starting from 4? Duh. Would I prefer to see 300% improvement? Duh. But 50% is a tangible improvement. I just think your distaste for K9 is clouding your opinion on everything he says.
So a first round playoff loss next year sours you on the regime? I mean, I certainly want more. But man, do you not remember the dreck we trotted out onto the field at the beginning of last season?If Gannon and his regime only gets a 50% every year from last year, I'll be pretty sour on them after their 9-9 season.
Well based on the model, the Cardinals won 4 games last year and a 50% increase is 6 wins. The year after that, 50% increase puts them at 9 wins, but there is a good chance the NFL is unleashing 18 games schedules by that point.So a first round playoff loss next year sours you on the regime? I mean, I certainly want more. But man, do you not remember the dreck we trotted out onto the field at the beginning of last season?
I'm talking about nine wins next year (2025). If we see marked improvement this year and have a productive off-season, I think 9 wins would be a massive disappointment in year three of Gannon.Well we’re not a very good football team, lol.
There’s a problem with expectations if “we’re all” saying JG needs to go after winning 9 games.
Yea, I noticed which is why I deleted. Incredible how you caught that so fast lol.I'm talking about nine wins next year (2025). If we see marked improvement this year and have a productive off-season, I think 9 wins would be a massive disappointment in year three of Gannon.
This is...badxc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
What was bad? Curious as to whether or not it’s a graphic design comment. Or just that it was done?This is...bad
He isn't Tongan.What was bad? Curious as to whether or not it’s a graphic design comment. Or just that it was done?
I don’t think people realize how good he is. If he were on the Chefs, he’d be a pro bowler. Plus, there are no good offensive lines without a good center. Dude is totally holding up his end.
From Tonga....Asian Pacific Islander month...Or maybe because it says “Tongan”. Not sure what that is, I thought he is a Dane? I dunno.