The Brian Hoyer thread...

[Randolphkeys]

I've never felt the need to assign an adjective to someone's state of mind simply because we have differing opinions on an issue.

I did, and it got a shit load of positive feedback. That's because whatever adjective you would prefer to angry, it was a downer.

 

[jlj3184]

I did, and it got a shit load of positive feedback. That's because whatever adjective you would prefer to angry, it was a downer.

Not sure what you're getting at. Making the anti-Hoyer camp out to be angry would be akin to me calling pro-Hoyer folks "delusional", "biased", "homers", or "misinformed". Resorting to cheap insults doesn't strengthen a position.

In this very thread, people were calling Hoyer a top-10 QB after 3 starts this season. I mean, Christ, even the most ardent Hoyer supporters have come back to Earth a bit. He's a below average starting quarterback by nearly every metric out there. Pointing that out doesn't make anyone angry. It makes them grounded in reality.

 

[The Oi]

I'd like to break up the tension in here with a little bit of tranny porn, but I'll need @Randolphkeys or @SuperSurge the #SuperSellout to authorize first.

I don't want to get @QuadrupleDouble and @Deezus going in here with their typical idiocy.

 

[Randolphkeys]

I'd like to break up the tension in here with a little bit of tranny porn, but I'll need @Randolphkeys or @SuperSurge the #SuperSellout to authorize first.

I don't want to get @QuadrupleDouble and @Deezus going in here with their typical idiocy.

Discussing the Browns without making it a pissing contest ought to take care of the problem.

Hoyer had one of his bottom three performances as a Brown, subtract the game winning drive and its flat out his worst. We can certainly talk about that without embedding the personal attacks that have become way too prevalent.

And again... they still won!

 

[QuadrupleDouble]

Discussing the Browns without making it a pissing contest ought to take care of the problem.

Hoyer had one of his bottom three performances as a Brown, subtract the game winning drive and its flat out his worst. We can certainly talk about that without embedding the personal attacks that have become way too prevalent.

And again... they still won!

Translation? I want to see that chick jerk that dick

 

[Randolphkeys]

Translation? I want to see that chick jerk that dick

Transgender Day of Remembrance was Thursday. No seriously, it was:

http://www.technicianonline.com/news/article_c5c29558-7399-11e4-b07e-ff9e27bfaa19.html

You missed your window of tranny opportunity.

While those two carries might have been the straw that broke the camel's back for Ben Tate's run in Cleveland, it's hardly an excuse for the lack of effectiveness in the passing game.

Yes, the running game failed to establish itself. The fact of the matter is, with less than 1/3 of his dropbacks being affected by pressure, Hoyer was unable to complete passes every QB should make with regularity.

Let's get back to the Browns, this isn't EAYOR. Out of curiosity, how do you feel about the role of the backs in pass protection lately? We talked about some serious miscues against Houston. Reminder again, I'm not playing the blame game for some bad throws against Atlanta. We are all pretty much on the same page with that game.

 

[bob2the2nd]

-5.5 from PFF. OL +4.9, WR +2.6.

Def +8.2

His Houston game was updated to a -7.6, but they just have an anti-Hoyer agenda. Just dumb fans rating players and they're probably huge Manziel fans.

hell if they keep re-judging his performance by the end of the season it may go down as the worst performance in league history by a QB.

jlj3184, this is the EXACT problem with whatever "formula" they are using. its changing. you simply cannot have a formula that is going to grade a player, and then have that grading change. It is literally the exact same performance getting re-graded with a different score. How can anyone trust any sort of formula like that? its a subjective grading, and its bullshit. its literally the exact same thing as someone liking colt mccoy because he has "it".

last week hoyer went 20-50 for 330 yards 1 TD and 1 INT and was graded at a -7.6, this week 23-40 for 320 yards an 3 INTs. his rating -5.5. When anyone who watched the game this week would put it as one of hoyers absolute worst performances as a brown, and the reason the game was so close. Where as last week plenty of blame to go around to everyone, and hoyer didnt stand out amount hte rest. so why in gods green fucking earth was hoyer's grade this week better than last week? When its clear to day in both the stats and performance hoyer's day this week was significantly worse?

 

[AZ_]

I can absolutely make an argument that the Houston game was worse.

30 incompletions and was wholly ineffective, whereas at least on Sunday he put together a couple capable drives resulting in scores.

I don't think Sunday was clearly his worst game, though it was his worst in terms of turning the ball over. I do think he was slightly more efficient overall.

Both fall under the horse abortion category, especially coming off his best performance two weeks ago against Cincy.

If nothing else, I'll take PFF's word for it over your theory of "he had 330 yards and a TD, what's everyone complaining about" theory of last week.

 

[jlj3184]

bob, no one is claiming PFF to be the be-all-end-all metric. What I will say is that it's more comprehensive than anything else out there. They put grades out within 24 hours then re-validate the grades. Sometimes they change, sometimes they don't. It's called being thorough, not arbitrary.

We get it, you think it's dumb because there's not a nice, neat little formula wrapped in a bow for you to scrutinize. All your disparaging comments aside, I'll stick to using it because it's the best out there. If it's good enough for teams and players/agents to use, it's good enough for me.

Would you like to use QB rating instead? How about ESPN QBR? At this point, it doesn't matter - Hoyer is in the 20s in nearly everything. If you want to continue to point to yards and TDs/INTs as the only thing that matter for a QB, feel free.

Simple question for you...does the QB deserve the same amount of credit for throwing a 40 yard, perfectly placed pass to a WR after avoiding the rush as he does for a 3 yard slant from a clean pocket when the WR breaks 3 tackles and goes 37 YAC? Both plays are 40 yard TD passes from the QB and would be counted the same in QB Rating and QBR.

 

[bob2the2nd]

I can absolutely make an argument that the Houston game was worse.

30 incompletions and was wholly ineffective, whereas at least on Sunday he put together a couple capable drives resulting in scores.

I don't think Sunday was clearly his worst game, though it was his worst in terms of turning the ball over. I do think he was slightly more efficient overall.

Both fall under the horse abortion category, especially coming off his best performance two weeks ago against Cincy.

If nothing else, I'll take PFF's word for it over your theory of "he had 330 yards and a TD, what's everyone complaining about" theory of last week.

i have you on ignore because your posts are intolerable. but i will respond with this.

if you were a baseball fan (ive hear rumors), and someone ranked any random player X in baseball on "how they looked" with no further explanation, you would be okay with that? because thats what PFF is doing.

1) they have biased (Because its by a human) analysis.
2) we have no idea who is doing the "analyzing"
3) we have no idea how much its worth in their system
4) we have no idea formulas for evaluation

and no one finds that fishy? we are suppose to take a website that charges for its services, with no concrete explanation, or proof anyone actually uses its methods as the end all be all evaluation of a player?

 

[bob2the2nd]

bob, no one is claiming PFF to be the be-all-end-all metric. What I will say is that it's more comprehensive than anything else out there. They put grades out within 24 hours then re-validate the grades. Sometimes they change, sometimes they don't. It's called being thorough, not arbitrary.

.

PROVE IT.
thats all i ask. show me how they are so comprehensive. they dont reveal their analysis methods, so how in gods green earth can you come to the conclusion they are comprehensive?

 

[bob2the2nd]

@jlj3184 i work in data analysis. its what i do. I am a DoD contractor for a joint program. So when a company says to me their product can do X, we test it.

For example last year we had a company come up to us and tell us we should choose their piece of equipment over anyone else, and provided "unbiased data", with no methodology of why we should choose them. So because we were testing a whole group of equipment we threw it into the testing lot. out of 5 pieces of equipment this thing ended up 3rd. The problem is they have done such a good job of selling it, we have one of the services demanding, they provide us with that piece of equipment, not the piece of equipment that we test to be #1. We have mounds of data showing why this random piece of equipment is no different than anything else and the service doesnt want to listen to us.

So when you show me X website, that charges for its services, with absolutely no methodology, and total lack of openness. youll excuse when i believe they are full of shit.

 

[jlj3184]

PROVE IT.
thats all i ask. show me how they are so comprehensive. they dont reveal their analysis methods, so how in gods green earth can you come to the conclusion they are comprehensive?

I notice you keep avoiding my question...perhaps it's because the answer doesn't jive with your agenda.

Part of my faith in their system revolves around who uses their numbers. Top media, teams, players. There must be something behind it if people closest to the game find it useful. bob, if you had a proprietary formula that is your bread and butter would you post it out there for free so anyone could use it? Doubtful. They outline their methodology extensively on their site.

It's not perfect, as they freely admit. What it provides is an idea of how well someone performed throughout the game. If you want to argue that a -3.0 is not 10% worse than a -2.7, I'll grant you that argument. Don't get too hung up on the specifics. I use it to validate what I saw on the field...and it usually does that.

 

[jlj3184]

@jlj3184 i work in data analysis. its what i do. I am a DoD contractor for a joint program. So when a company says to me their product can do X, we test it.

For example last year we had a company come up to us and tell us we should choose their piece of equipment over anyone else, and provided "unbiased data", with no methodology of why we should choose them. So because we were testing a whole group of equipment we threw it into the testing lot. out of 5 pieces of equipment this thing ended up 3rd. The problem is they have done such a good job of selling it, we have one of the services demanding, they provide us with that piece of equipment, not the piece of equipment that we test to be #1. We have mounds of data showing why this random piece of equipment is no different than anything else and the service doesnt want to listen to us.

So when you show me X website, that charges for its services, with absolutely no methodology, and total lack of openness. youll excuse when i believe they are full of shit.

No, I won't. I've been in the DoD business for a hot minute and just because something "performs better" in a laboratory doesn't mean it should be selected. Things like user interface, functionality, size, and a myriad of other factors (minority-owned companies, female-owned companies, retired O-6+ buddy, etc) play into which gadget gets through the acquisition process. At the end of the day, the user should get what they want. You're doing your job to present your findings, but if the user wants something different, that's their call to make.

Is the problem here that you can't see their exact formula or that you can't bring yourself to step outside of your engineering box and realize that performance in a football game is not easily derived down to a cutesy mathematical formula?

 

[spydy13]

I know that many of the people that think that Hoyer is not very good and won't be able to take us to the next level also don't think Johnny is the answer. So what would those people want us to do this offseason?

I'm not in love with the QBs available in the draft this year (and don't think we could realistically get up high enough to take one of the good ones). So would letting Hoyer go to the highest bidder and then letting Johnny get a full year to definitively see what he can do be such a bad thing?

If he sucks that we'll be at the top of the draft again and can get a top QB. If he somehow proves that he is capable, then we have our guy at a fraction of the price that Hoyer will demand next year.