Quote:
Originally Posted by Hail to the Redskins
The attacks are really getting old...
1) Supporting staffs?? We returned more staff from last year than the Dolphins/Falcons (not sure on Ravens, but i'd say there too)
... the WHOLE POINT of the argument revolves around the specific area of those team's HC/OC portion of their staff being a much more productive, successful, talented group than ours...
2)Schedule? Like I said... we are 2-2 versus teams with a combined 5-47-1 record versus the rest of the league... hello?? don't talk about strength of schedule...
if comparing one NFL coaching staff to another NFL coaching staff isn't logically or statistically prudent enough for you, maybe you should take an introductory course on the word logic..
|
If one wishes to criticize the Redskins, there exists ample material with which to do that. Many posters on this site have produced effective and often devastating analyses attacking both the coaching staff and the players. Very edifying, love reading it. However, comparing the Skins to the Dolphins, or Falcons, or 85 Bears, or 96 Chicago Bulls, or whatever is completely arbitrary and irrelevant. That’s not the standard by which we judge them. Now, it's one thing to produce smart analysis drawing parallels between coaching staffs with similar traits and circumstances. This type of soft-analysis is what good sportswriters and good posters do. It is another to point at a different team with a new coach and QB and say, see, their success mathematically, incontrovertibly proves the Redskins suck. One is interesting, the other is ass stoopid.
I wouldn't have so big a problem with your thread if you weren't imbuing it with the language of statistics, something you clearly don't understand.