Originally posted by Critty
View Post
Seriously, in your post to which I responded, you set forth the exact reason why my post was correct in the midst of your assertion that my take was "not a solid argument". My "not a solid argument" stood for the proposition that factors other than turnovers could more than offset turnovers. Over and over again I have shown both team and individual QB examples of exactly that point.
When you pointed out that Mahomes threw so many more TDs than Smith, you referred to one factor that helped serve to offset Mahomes having many more INTs than Smith. You can see that Mahomes was more effective overall despite being far worse in turnovers. That was exactly my point--that one QB could turn the ball over more, even significantly more, than another QB and still be better than that other QB.
You are also wrong about the team's first priority. The first priority for the offense is to move the ball and score points. The first priority of the defense is to stop the other side from moving the ball and scoring points. Turnovers and lack thereof can be a piece of that overall objective, but playing scared Tyrod ball gets the team nowhere unless we are playing the Bengals without their best defensive player and against an ineffective rookie QB making his first start and we happen to get lucky with an OPI call against the Bengals and the kicker's leg cramping.
Allen misses a pitch to Ekeler for a TD; Tillery gets called for lining up over the center on a FG, which results in a TD; The OL causes the incompletion ruled a fumble leading to three points; and Herbert threw an INT worth three points. Why are you emphasizing the Herbert INT and not the Allen missed pitch or the Tillery penalty, each of which was more costly than the Herbert INT?
Do you concede that Herbert is much better than Taylor? Yes or no.
Comment