If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
All: The new Billszone site with the updated software is scheduled to be turned on Tuesday, May 21, 2024. The company that built it, Dynascale, estimates a FOUR HOUR shut down, from 8pm Pacific, (5pm Eastern) while they get it up and running. Nobody will be able to post in any forum until they are done. Afterwards, you may need to do a web search for the site, as old links will not work, because the site is getting a new IP address. Please be patient. If there are bugs, we will tackle them one at a time. Remember the goal is to be up and running with no glitches by camp. Doing this now assures us of that, because it gives us all summer to get our ducks in a row. Thank you!
It’s impossible to measure what “cost” a team a game. Countless numbers of intangibles go into that. One or two turnovers play a role but are usually not the sole reason for a loss. Even if they come at the end of a game, a million other things happened leading up to that turnover to cause a team to lose a game. I guess an example of a player losing a game for a team would be Lucas in the first Miami game, just for the sheer amount of turnovers. And even still, one could find other reasons why Miami lost.
As to the idea of comparing which player’s turnover’s were more costly, I think it’s impossible to compare the two positions. The risk of a QB’s passes being intercepted are much higher then that of a running back fumbling. It’s not unheard of for a RB to go an entire season without fumbling once. But if a QB were to go a whole season without an INT, it would be the talk of the town. I’m going to pull numbers out of the top of my head here, but I’d say that it’s unacceptable for a running back to fumble more then three times during a season. Whereas one could expect a QB to throw AT LEAST 7 or 8 ints and it’s usually up in the double digits.
My point is that it’s impossible to compare the two because QB’s should always have more Int’s then a RB. And thus it would always seem like they cost the team more games.
I say Henry's because his turnovers affected the way our offense was run. Bledsoe's turnovers occured at a respectably low rate, so the frequency with which we passed didn't need to be changed to compensate for the increased rate of turnovers.
Conversely, Henry's turnovers occured so frequent that Gilbride justifiably lost faith in giving him the ball in short yardage situations and other key times in the game.
All in all though, I must agree with BF1, our defenses lack of turnovers are what caused most of our turnovers to be key turnovers ... our D was never able to make the big play to make up for a mistake on offense.
Comment