Everyone is talking about time of possession. That is mind bogglingly stupid. Winning is about offensive and defensive efficiency. Scores and stops. It has nothing at all to do with time. If Mahomes scores in one play every possession that’s really efficient but won’t take up any time. Moreover if we take a 12 minute drive and fumble at the 2, that isn’t going to win any games but by god we’ll win the time of possession.
Fucking pussies like Squirmin Herman Motherfucking Sack of Cunt Edwards talk about time of possession. Winners talk about scores and stops. [Reply]
somebody should go dig up the stats on all games last week and see who wins and who loses when a team has the ball 10 more mins than the other... [Reply]
Originally Posted by Buehler445:
Are you seriously advocating foregoing points in favor of an unknown?
Are you actually Herm?
No, but in some situations, a drive that takes time off the clock that ends in a score is better than a short drive that ends in a score. Why do you act like you cant have both and there aren't situations that call for one or the other? [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
No, but in some situations, a drive that takes time off the clock that ends in a score is better than a short drive that ends in a score. Why do you act like you cant have both and there aren't situations that call for one or the other?
You are right, but that situation only exists in 1-2 games a year and in the 4th quarter, at the end of the game. Which has very almost no correlation to time of possession. [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
No, but in some situations, a drive that takes time off the clock that ends in a score is better than a short drive that ends in a score. Why do you act like you cant have both and there aren't situations that call for one or the other?
I’m not.
I don’t know how you got down this convoluted road.
I said TOP is only correlated to winning. The team needs to focus on what actually causes winning. Which is scores and stops.
You disagree and start talking about hypothetical situations in which we both score. Because... reasons?
Fact remains that TOP is correlated to winning. You disagreed but haven’t provided any evidence to the contrary. [Reply]
Originally Posted by R8RFAN:
somebody should go dig up the stats on all games last week and see who wins and who loses when a team has the ball 10 more mins than the other...
Correlation not causation.
I bet if you looked up which teams had more scores and stops than the other team they win - causation.
They may or may not win TOP - correlation. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Buehler445:
If our coaches are going to turn this around they are going to have to quit ****ing talk about time of possession and figure out how to get scores and stops.
Ummmmm, you possess the ball in order to get more scores and stops.:-)
Originally Posted by WhiteWhale:
No, TOP is TOP in basketball AND football. Has nothing to do with rebounding.
So when a team rebounds the ball they don't have possession of it ?:-)
Originally Posted by WhiteWhale:
KC is getting cleaned out on TOP because they can't stop the run
Originally Posted by WhiteWhale:
and absolutely refuse to run the ball themselves no matter if it's working or not.
Reid knows he cannot run the ball at will(and why he abandons because defenses make their adjustments) and PM2 II is talented enough to get away with throwing 75-80% of the time assuming everyone is healthy and even when they are not Reid still throws cuz he knows he still has a chance with Pat.
Originally Posted by WhiteWhale:
Fix the ACTUAL issues and TOP cleans itself up.
Couldn't agree more.
The horrid defense is a given issue BUT until that gets fixed it is our offensive line that cannot pass block nor run block against good d-lines that is our next biggest issue
Originally Posted by WhiteWhale:
TOP is IRRELEVANT if you're scoring fast.
We are not scoring fast therefore TOP is very relevant.
Originally Posted by WhiteWhale:
IT's very relevant when the disparity is powered by lots of incomplete passes, 3 and outs, and a acompletely inept run defense.
Originally Posted by WhiteWhale:
It's not a problem you address directly. It's a lot of other problems that are creating it.
You address directly by getting better o-line play and a better run defense BUT this is not happening this year unfortunately IMHO.
Originally Posted by Buehler445:
I mean there is a case to be made for a 4 minute offense but I still can’t turn down touchdowns.
and who would ? Not me !! BUT we are not scoring fast so..........
Originally Posted by Buehler445:
The team needs to focus on what actually causes winning. Which is scores and stops.
Were not getting either in a timely fashion it seems. Therefore what do you do then? You try to possess the ball to get more opportunities, I think?:-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by Buehler445:
Everyone is talking about time of possession. That is mind bogglingly stupid. Winning is about offensive and defensive efficiency. Scores and stops. It has nothing at all to do with time. If Mahomes scores in one play every possession that’s really efficient but won’t take up any time. Moreover if we take a 12 minute drive and fumble at the 2, that isn’t going to win any games but by god we’ll win the time of possession.
****ing pussies like Squirmin Herman Mother****ing Sack of **** Edwards talk about time of possession. Winners talk about scores and stops.
This is phenomenally short-sighted. Yes, drive efficiency matters. Getting a drive that results in a score in 1:20 is theoretically Much better than getting a field goal in 12:00. However, it ignores that this is a game which is played by humans, operating at the peak or near the peak of their effort level, who get tired.
If you think your defense sucks right when they get on the field, how do you think they'll look after they've been out there 40 minutes? Defenses getting "worn down" results in greater drive efficiency for the opposing team, whereas facing a well-rested defense that is fresh as a daisy when you're in the 4th quarter is sub-optimal for your own drive efficiency.
Ultimately, time of possession is about effective energy levels, and differences in time of possession can be mitigated by differences in conditioning level, or can exacerbate existing differences. The Falcons vs the Patriots in the Super Bowl started out hot, Way too hot, burned up all the energy of their young, super-fast team, and then lost because they got tired, and it resulted in notable differences in the level of play and execution. The Chiefs offense is already bad for the defense in that they're a quick-strike team that gets off the field quickly, whether or not they score. The Chiefs defense letting drives drag out relentlessly and letting themselves get worn down adds to that, and results in a second-half defense which let's just say leaves something to be desired, and fails to set up the offense for max success in the late stages of the game. [Reply]
