Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

When the going gets tough: Put in Sage, Pull Carr

TwinSisters

TwinSisters

Veteran
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2006/06/26/ramblings/stat-analysis/3978/

Nothing really all that telling here, but an interesting article nonetheless.

Full Results

162 quarterbacks have had at least one fourth-quarter comeback opportunity since 1996. There are 24 instances in which two quarterbacks saw action in a failed comeback game, usually due to injury or ineffectiveness of the primary quarterback.

Based on t-tests, 21 quarterbacks have been significantly “good” at fourth-quarter comebacks since 1996 and 18 quarterbacks have been significantly “not good” by the same test (all at the .95 level). The top 10 and bottom 10 are listed above in Table 1 and Table 2. Here are the others:

Significantly good: Aaron Brooks, Tim Couch, Trent Green, Kent Graham, Steve Young, Ben Roethlisberger, John Elway, Kordell Stewart, Daunte Culpepper, Elvis Grbac, Rich Gannon.

Significantly bad: Neil O’Donnell, Doug Flutie, Frank Reich (yes, the same Frank Reich who led the greatest postseason comeback in NFL history in 1992, prior to this study), Gus Frerotte, David Carr, Jim Harbaugh, Matt Hasselbeck, Billy Joe Tolliver.
Click to expand...

Billy Joe Tolliver is ranked with Carr... I think I am going to start the Lord's Prayer right now.
 
:hides:

I guess I can play spin doctor.. I have also seen our defense NOT step up and make the key stop in the forth quarter to give us a chance

we have seen where we need a key 3rd down pickup in the 4th to keep the clock running and sadly we didn't
 
...and Kent Graham is ranked with John Elway. Like this is something to take seriously? Good gawd.
 
This is one of those times when you have a theory, apply it, look at the results and say bad Mr. Theory and smack it on the head. Useless results both ends.
 
Significantly bad: Neil O’Donnell, Doug Flutie, Frank Reich (yes, the same Frank Reich who led the greatest postseason comeback in NFL history in 1992, prior to this study), Gus Frerotte, David Carr, Jim Harbaugh, Matt Hasselbeck, Billy Joe Tolliver.
Click to expand...
Jim "Captain Comeback" Harbaugh made this list?
 
TwinSisters said:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2006/06/26/ramblings/stat-analysis/3978/

Nothing really all that telling here, but an interesting article nonetheless.



Billy Joe Tolliver is ranked with Carr... I think I am going to start the Lord's Prayer right now.
Click to expand...


Wow....... Aaron Brooks, Tim Couch, and Kordell Stewart rated in the top ten....

yet none of them are gauranteed starters..... heck, two of the three will definitely not start.

In all fairness to Carr...... as many comeback situations he's been in is probalby diluting his stats.
 
Soooo, I guess this is another of those Carr threads that are constantly started by all the Carr lovers as KT keeps saying is what happens all the time. Couldn't POSSIBLY be a "Let's start one to be able to take a shot at Carr thread". Nah, no one starts those, just always those pesky Carr lovers gushing about that piece of road apples QB, and a certain band of folks has to maintain world balance by responding. Yup, guess that's what is happening.
 
thunderkyss said:
Wow....... Aaron Brooks, Tim Couch, and Kordell Stewart rated in the top ten....

yet none of them are gauranteed starters..... heck, two of the three will definitely not start.

In all fairness to Carr...... as many comeback situations he's been in is probalby diluting his stats.
Click to expand...

Folks who rely on Brooks, Couch and Stewart as examples should "probalby" not throw stones or the only "gauranteed" result will be their glass house falling.
 
infantrycak said:
Folks who rely on Brooks, Couch and Stewart as examples should "probalby" not throw stones or the only "gauranteed" result will be their glass house falling.
Click to expand...


The Texans are in the same boat....... except those guys have at least one winning season under their belts...
 
And I didn't think there would be any more new and interesting topics until the depth chart was released prior to camp.
 
Runner said:
And I didn't think there would be any more new and interesting topics until the depth chart was released prior to camp.
Click to expand...
And you were....ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!!!! LOL
 
Hopefully this coaching staff will have the good sense to pull Carr when he's playing poorly or they are way behind. I never understood why Capers refused to bench the guy.
 
the wonger need food said:
Hopefully this coaching staff will have the good sense to pull Carr when he's playing poorly or they are way behind. I never understood why Capers refused to bench the guy.
Click to expand...
I agree. A benching couldn't have been worse than all the pounding he was taking.
 
the wonger need food said:
Hopefully this coaching staff will have the good sense to pull Carr when he's playing poorly or they are way behind. I never understood why Capers refused to bench the guy.
Click to expand...

Because Banks and Ragone were that much worse.

I agree that Carr might have been pulled a time or two, if only to preserve him when the game was out of reach, but in general I think they were trying to build some sort of momentum and/or continuity last year, and felt DC should get all the reps he could. That, and Banks and Ragone really were that much worse.
 
jerek said:
Because Banks and Ragone were that much worse.

I agree that Carr might have been pulled a time or two, if only to preserve him when the game was out of reach, but in general I think they were trying to build some sort of momentum and/or continuity last year, and felt DC should get all the reps he could. That, and Banks and Ragone really were that much worse.
Click to expand...

HaHa, I was getting ready to mention that. In the past 4 years does anyone really beleive that the line/offense would've blocked better, run routes better, etc, etc. for any other QB? I think negative.:stirpot:
 
jerek said:
Because Banks and Ragone were that much worse.

I agree that Carr might have been pulled a time or two, if only to preserve him when the game was out of reach, but in general I think they were trying to build some sort of momentum and/or continuity last year, and felt DC should get all the reps he could. That, and Banks and Ragone really were that much worse.
Click to expand...
After all of the revelations about the prvious regime, I find that argument hard to follow. Banks did ok when he was in and we never saw Rgone in the NFL did we? Ragone tore up the Europe league. I think they should have pulled him several time because the only continuity they preserved was pain, punishment and demoralization of Carr and the team in general. Hell, Bradshaw and Staubach were benched more than once in their careers.
 
jerek said:
Because Banks and Ragone were that much worse.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know about that. If you remember SF game... Banks came in the second half and had as good of a game statistically as Carr had put together all season. Carr was 4/11 with 23 yards in that game. The guy was one of the worst QB's in the NFL at the end of last season. I believe Banks would have gotten them at least 2 more wins.
 
the wonger need food said:
I believe Banks would have gotten them at least 2 more wins.
Click to expand...
And the NFL agrees with you as Tony signed a big free agent contract with...Nobody.
 
DocBar said:
After all of the revelations about the prvious regime, I find that argument hard to follow. Banks did ok when he was in and we never saw Rgone in the NFL did we? Ragone tore up the Europe league. I think they should have pulled him several time because the only continuity they preserved was pain, punishment and demoralization of Carr and the team in general. Hell, Bradshaw and Staubach were benched more than once in their careers.
Click to expand...

NFL Europe league has almost zero to do with predicting success in the NFL. It's like saying we should put in Tommy Chang because he tore up the WAC. Banks didn't necessarily suffer from the "Carrisms" that many people on this MB associate with Carr (i.e. sacks, running out of bounds to avoid the hit, etc., things that IMO are blown way out of proportion) but I'd rather my QB run out of bounds than sling the ball to the D. After Carr went out against San Francisco Banks threw what -- two INTs? -- to one of the very worst defenses in the entire NFL.

Given that both were immediately cut by the new coaching and have since played musical teams, I think this lends some credibility to the notion that neither deserved to see our field last year. I have it on good authority that both were bums in practice last year and I'll stand on that.
 
jerek said:
NFL Europe league has almost zero to do with predicting success in the NFL. It's like saying we should put in Tommy Chang because he tore up the WAC. Banks didn't necessarily suffer from the "Carrisms" that many people on this MB associate with Carr (i.e. sacks, running out of bounds to avoid the hit, etc., things that IMO are blown way out of proportion) but I'd rather my QB run out of bounds than sling the ball to the D. After Carr went out against San Francisco Banks threw what -- two INTs? -- to one of the very worst defenses in the entire NFL.

Given that both were immediately cut by the new coaching and have since played musical teams, I think this lends some credibility to the notion that neither deserved to see our field last year. I have it on good authority that both were bums in practice last year and I'll stand on that.
Click to expand...
By no means was I suggesting we put them in expecting a miraculous comeback. My point is that Carr has taken some needless pounding and, witha couple of excpetions, not prone to lighting up the scoreboard. Why not pull him and see what Ragone could do. Is he playing musical teams? I hadn't heard that. Anyway, not saing they were great or even particularly good. It's just bad to let your franchise QB get the snot beat out of him in a futile effort.
 
DocBar said:
By no means was I suggesting we put them in expecting a miraculous comeback. My point is that Carr has taken some needless pounding and, witha couple of excpetions, not prone to lighting up the scoreboard. Why not pull him and see what Ragone could do. Is he playing musical teams? I hadn't heard that. Anyway, not saing they were great or even particularly good. It's just bad to let your franchise QB get the snot beat out of him in a futile effort.
Click to expand...

Banks has not been signed by any one.

Ragone was signed by Cincinatti I believe, and is now -- only a few months later -- with the Rams, currently fourth on their roster if I am not mistaken.

And like I say, I can agree with benching Carr to a point, but IMO it should have only been done when the game was clearly out of reach and more for purposes of resting him than "seeing what someone else can do" -- someone who hadn't practiced well and was not, by any expectation, going to do better.

People who have not been athletes at a high level rarely understand the role of good practice in receiving or earning playing time. Not to talk down to anyone here, but if a person hasn't played in at least college athletics, I don't expect them to understand that (and maybe you have, I was making the comment generally rather than pointed at any one person.)
 
the wonger need food said:
Banks came in the second half and had as good of a game statistically as Carr had put together all season.
Click to expand...

So now 56 % comp., a .5 TD/INT ratio and 57.6 QB rating is just as good as 60%, 1.3 TD/INT ratio and 77.2 QB rating. :ok:

and obviously it would be silly to think 73.5 % comp. 3 TD/INT and a 116.4 QB rating was better.
 
jerek said:
Banks has not been signed by any one.

Ragone was signed by Cincinatti I believe, and is now -- only a few months later -- with the Rams, currently fourth on their roster if I am not mistaken.

And like I say, I can agree with benching Carr to a point, but IMO it should have only been done when the game was clearly out of reach and more for purposes of resting him than "seeing what someone else can do" -- someone who hadn't practiced well and was not, by any expectation, going to do better.

People who have not been athletes at a high level rarely understand the role of good practice in receiving or earning playing time. Not to talk down to anyone here, but if a person hasn't played in at least college athletics, I don't expect them to understand that (and maybe you have, I was making the comment generally rather than pointed at any one person.)
Click to expand...
I played a different form of atheletics. I think we're on the same page, just disagree with the definition of the game being out of reach.
 
edo783 said:
Soooo, I guess this is another of those Carr threads that are constantly started by all the Carr lovers as KT keeps saying is what happens all the time. Couldn't POSSIBLY be a "Let's start one to be able to take a shot at Carr thread". Nah, no one starts those, just always those pesky Carr lovers gushing about that piece of road apples QB, and a certain band of folks has to maintain world balance by responding. Yup, guess that's what is happening.
Click to expand...

Simply do an advanced search and you will find that there have been hardly any Carr threads started as of late. They just have a long life. The problem is with non Carr threads that turn into Carr threads. Nah, that would be too much work to look into.
 
infantrycak said:
So now 56 % comp., a .5 TD/INT ratio and 57.6 QB rating is just as good as 60%, 1.3 TD/INT ratio and 77.2 QB rating. :ok:

and obviously it would be silly to think 73.5 % comp. 3 TD/INT and a 116.4 QB rating was better.
Click to expand...

Who has time for trivialities like stats when one needs to find another basis for disliking the guy other than family commitment and nice hair?
 
jerek said:
Who has time for trivialities like stats when one needs to find another basis for disliking the guy other than family commitment and nice hair?
Click to expand...

Thats my gripe with him...:mario:
 
jerek said:
Who has time for trivialities like stats when one needs to find another basis for disliking the guy other than family commitment and nice hair?
Click to expand...
According to the DD vs. AFC thread, stats are completely useless when judging talent. It all has to do with personal opinion.
 
jerek said:
Who has time for trivialities like stats when one needs to find another basis for disliking the guy other than family commitment and nice hair?
Click to expand...

When his hair was long and parted through the middle, I always thought it looked a little queerish.:tease:
 
the wonger need food said:
Well, I don't know about that. If you remember SF game... Banks came in the second half and had as good of a game statistically as Carr had put together all season. Carr was 4/11 with 23 yards in that game. The guy was one of the worst QB's in the NFL at the end of last season. I believe Banks would have gotten them at least 2 more wins.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding? He threw 2 INTs that cost us the game against by far the worst defense in the league.
 
Couch
TOTAL 62 59 1714 1025 59.8 11131 6.49 79 64 67 166/1119 129 28 75.1

Carr
TOTAL 60 59 1628 941 57.8 10624 6.53 81 48 53 208/1226 118 18 73.7

---

On Favre: the interesting thing is that Holmgren has blown a lot of late leads.

Plummer and Kitna never had really good teams with solid defenses behind them.

Testaverde never did either... so-so to good defenses in Tampa and New York.

Kerry Collins: wonder if he scored the majority of his comebacks in NY or Carolina? Because Capers ranks on the bottom for blown leads.

Daunte Culpepper : Terrible defenses. Offensive lines fluxed once on him. Was Mike Tice that much better of a coach then Dom Capers?Is Randy Moss that GOOD and that much better then Andre Johnson? Was Michael Bennett that much better then Davis?
 
DocBar said:
According to the DD vs. AFC thread, stats are completely useless when judging talent. It all has to do with personal opinion.
Click to expand...

Exactly....Talent and productivity(Stats) have nothing to do with one another...IMO, Lavar Arrington is one of the top three talented LB's in the NFL...But he's not very productive....which means his stats aren't high...But that doesn't mean he isn't talented...There is no way you can look at a piece of paper with numbers and know who is the more talented player...You can make assumptions from those numbers, but you might see them play in person and change your mind on who is more talented...
 
xtruroyaltyx said:
Exactly....Talent and productivity(Stats) have nothing to do with one another...IMO, Lavar Arrington is one of the top three talented LB's in the NFL...But he's not very productive....which means his stats aren't high...But that doesn't mean he isn't talented...There is no way you can look at a piece of paper with numbers and know who is the more talented player...You can make assumptions from those numbers, but you might see them play in person and change your mind on who is more talented...
Click to expand...
I am NOT having this discussion on 2 seperate threads!!! LMAO
 
jerek said:
And like I say, I can agree with benching Carr to a point, but IMO it should have only been done when the game was clearly out of reach and more for purposes of resting him than "seeing what someone else can do" -- someone who hadn't practiced well and was not, by any expectation, going to do better.

People who have not been athletes at a high level rarely understand the role of good practice in receiving or earning playing time. Not to talk down to anyone here, but if a person hasn't played in at least college athletics, I don't expect them to understand that (and maybe you have, I was making the comment generally rather than pointed at any one person.)
Click to expand...

I don't know, man....over 200 sacks in only four seasons doesn't seem like it's building anything with DC other than being a shell-shocked QB. You don't have to have played the game to see basic logic at work here.

And are you really implying that women have no clue about professional football? Afterall, NONE of them have played collegiate level football (much less high school levels). Texans Chick might just have to pimp slap you for that take. ;)

Personally, I think Banks should have started at least the first two seasons, and not necessarily because of merit. Starting a rookie QB behind an untested o-line on a brand new team just seems to most folks the epitome of brainless coaching.

Carr had more potential as a rookie than he does now, simply because of the bad habits and tendencies he's developed in four years of garbage offenses. He now has to unlearn all of the crap fed to him for the past four years.
 
jerek said:
Because Banks and Ragone were that much worse.

I agree that Carr might have been pulled a time or two, if only to preserve him when the game was out of reach, but in general I think they were trying to build some sort of momentum and/or continuity last year, and felt DC should get all the reps he could. That, and Banks and Ragone really were that much worse.
Click to expand...


I totally agree, but I would add..... after three games into the season, it should've been obvious to the coaching staff, that we had some protection issues......... I'd have pulled Carr, and thrown Banks/Ragone in there. Sure, we still managed to be competitive in many games last year, and would have lost that, but leaving Carr in to get sacked 68 times, is stupid, regardless whose fault it is. We're Damn lucky he didn't get hurt too badly.
 
thunderkyss said:
I totally agree, but I would add..... after three games into the season, it should've been obvious to the coaching staff, that we had some protection issues......... I'd have pulled Carr, and thrown Banks/Ragone in there. Sure, we still managed to be competitive in many games last year, and would have lost that, but leaving Carr in to get sacked 68 times, is stupid, regardless whose fault it is. We're Damn lucky he didn't get hurt too badly.
Click to expand...

Just because your line is giving up a lot of sacks isn't reason to bench your franchise QB for the rest of the season. I can see pulling him from games that are out of reach, but automatically pulling him from whole games just because your OLine isn't performing up to par is not very good team management.
 
thunderkyss said:
I totally agree, but I would add..... after three games into the season, it should've been obvious to the coaching staff, that we had some protection issues......... I'd have pulled Carr, and thrown Banks/Ragone in there. Sure, we still managed to be competitive in many games last year, and would have lost that, but leaving Carr in to get sacked 68 times, is stupid, regardless whose fault it is. We're Damn lucky he didn't get hurt too badly.
Click to expand...

Yea, no kidding. We should've used the back-ups like crash dummies and saved Carr. Towards the end of the season instead of taking the hit for the sack, he was doing the duck and roll (sack-shocked)
 
Double Barrel said:
Personally, I think Banks should have started at least the first two seasons, and not necessarily because of merit. Starting a rookie QB behind an untested o-line on a brand new team just seems to most folks the epitome of brainless coaching.
Click to expand...

Hindsight is always 20/20......... but looking back, it's still a bit fuzzy


but I totally agree... setting a sack record after the first year, should've told somebody something.
 
MorKnolle said:
Just because your line is giving up a lot of sacks isn't reason to bench your franchise QB for the rest of the season. I can see pulling him from games that are out of reach, but automatically pulling him from whole games just because your OLine isn't performing up to par is not very good team management.
Click to expand...


we're lucky he still has his legs, and no concussions.....
 
HOU-TEX said:
Yea, no kidding. We should've used the back-ups like crash dummies and saved Carr. Towards the end of the season instead of taking the hit for the sack, he was doing the duck and roll (sack-shocked)
Click to expand...
HAHAHAHAHA!!!! Looked like he was going thru jump-school....tuck and roll
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top