And, for the record, yes, stats are, indeed for losers. All that counts are W's. You have not given us any argument to counter that claim.
Period.
I agree with you that you are what you are, in terms of record. But I really think that the "stats are for losers" argument was invented by poorly performing players (a la Trent Dilfer as that's his favorite phrase) to excuse their terrible play on a team that won pretty much in spite of them.
You can't argue that a 4,000 yard passer puts you in a position to win.
You can't argue that a 1,600 yard rusher puts you in a position to win.
You can't argue that leading the league in interceptions, sacks and fumbles puts you in a position to win.
These are all stats. They are not the end-all-be-all, but nobody is saying they are. They're signs of production and progress. If stats were for losers, then coaches wouldn't analyze them to find out how to improve those numbers.
Stats = production = W's. We haven't reaped the benefit of those W's, but I'll explain why at the bottom.
LOL!!!
I don't completely disregard individual stats. Matt Schaub has had such an amazing year that it blows me away. We have a freaking top shelf quarterback. But even then, it would have been nice to get a few more wins to really give him the national attention he truly deserves. That's a case of, 'The stats are great, but a few more wins would have been even better.'
I love Matt. I think he's the guy for us. But while he's producing at a high level for us, he's not coming through in the clutch yet consistently. He throw pick 6's during a two-minute drill to win the game. He fails to pick up the proper mike on blitzing plays sometimes. He still holds on to the ball too long. I'm confident that these things will be fixed, but that is why he's not there yet.
There is no running game, as we're all aware of. The old saying goes "you run to win the game", and whether or not that is true, it certainly highlights why we can't hold on to leads. There is no production here. I think we're on pace to finish the season without a single RB over 450 yards rushing. This stat alone tells you how poorly we're playing. I'm still not convinced we have all of the talent we need to be truly competitive. Unfortunately, Matt is no Peyton, who can win regardless of the talent around him (with the exception of an o-line, without that he's toast).
You say that stats are for losers and all that counts are W/L's. But I point to you our rushing stats and show you that this is a stat that shows why we're so high in the L column.
I agree that skewed stats (a la "the Colts have won so many consecutive regular season games yet they lost last postseason, but streak continues...or "Brett Favre has a " " passer rating in games played below whatever temperature) are meaningless and only serve as an interesting side-note to how the player/team might perform. But some stats truly are indicative of the W's and L's. We are what we are in terms of our record, but there are some telling stats that can point out why we are.
