What if I told You the Bears O-line is the 2nd best in the NFL?

ZOMBIE@CTESPN

ZOMBIE@CTESPN

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 19, 2012
Posts:
18,086
Liked Posts:
19,967
Location:
MICHIGAN
With the amount of energy you two have put into this topic for a week straight you should join forces and make a podcast together
 
remydat

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,139
Liked Posts:
38,158
dbldrew said:
the problem is you are going to have to rely on the human element for your other metrics and that by default is flawed. Humans get it wrong all the time, Humans all have biases, all make mistakes, and can look at the exact same thing and have 2 different conclusions. Look at how bad the officiating is and how different refs will call games completely differently, everyone knows the rules but some refs call PI and some let the players fight it out. What are the thresholds for determining the QB held the ball too long with the other metrics? How do they apply blame to a sack? its all a judgment call by whoever is looking at the play and one analyzers judgment will be different then another. There is no judgment call with the espn they specifically created it because of the flaws with human judgment.
"Those who are qualitatively determining whether a pressure existed on each play might have varying interpretations and definitions influenced by how a quarterback reacts. Our new metrics are totally objective and (with some minor exceptions) independent of the quarterback's reaction."

So the problem with your argument is the only thing you have to argue is rollouts might be skewing the data in the Bears favor, but as I have pointed out thats not the case, the rollout could also skew the data in the defenders favor it all depends on what side the defender picks to go around the blocker. Most likely its a wash..

So again if we swapped our OL with 30 other teams the other "judgment" based metrics you want to use would make the Bears look worse then they are now.

We know for a fact that Fields time to throw is 3.12 seconds and his OL PBWP is at 69% and a sack% of 14.4% so what happens if we swap our OL for the say the Arizona Cardinals? they have a PBWP of only 60%.. lower but Murray only has a 6% sack rate.. but Murray has a time to throw of 2.65 seconds. We swap OLs and Fields sack% goes up and Murrays goes down. And the "judgment" based metrics rate the OL for the Bears even worse..

that 3.12 second time to throw needs to come down and you know it, if that happens the OL will look much improved to the naked eye and will more reflect the PBWP
Click to expand...

There is always a human element. Humans designed the ESPN system. They made decisions on what threholds to apply, how long is long distance, etc. So we are left with you just want to believe they are right and everyone else is wrong because it suits your narrative. So just say you are biased and will only consider info that supports your preconceived bias.
 
ursamajor

ursamajor

D.J. Moore is phat
Donator
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
7,809
Liked Posts:
3,794
Location:
HHM’s Head
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
it certainly looks like the 2nd ranked oline in this game.
 

puckthefackers

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
779
Liked Posts:
922
peeps arguing that the Bears OL aint straight trash, holy shit thx 4 the laugh
 

TonyDogs

Well-known member
Joined:
May 4, 2021
Posts:
795
Liked Posts:
1,013
Another dominant performance by this elite unit for the Bears.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

10,885members
93,305threads
4,388,870posts
190online users

Members online NOW

  • Member
  • Admin
  • Mod
  • Donor
  • HOF
Total: 190 (members: 29, guests: 161)

Staff online NOW

Top