ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum (http://www.coltfreaks.com/forum/index.php)

- Indianapolis Colts Discussion (http://www.coltfreaks.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=7)

- - Pagano Watch (http://www.coltfreaks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25587)

Quote:

Originally Posted by apballin (Post 41027)

Or could it be teams make adjustments and crank up the intensity

I'm starting to think we're getting jabs from opposing teams defense in the 1st half then in the 2nd they go for the kill

I'd say they're still laughing at us when the game starts, then buckle down at halftime

Somebody should put the <still_waiting.jpg> meme in this thread. Not me, but somebody.

https://www.stampedeblue.com/2017/11...r-the-bye-week

Just going to leave this here.

Quote:

In theory, if the Colts want to win a game, they need to have at least a 17-point 1st half lead. This embarrassing stat reflects poorly on the coaching staff. A stat like this should be all the ammunition an owner and general manager needs to fire a head coach but this isn’t the only reason to make the change.

I like this one:

Here’s the breakdown of raw points in progression through each quarter (Points Earned vs Points Allowed):

1st (Even) | 2nd (+15) | 3rd (+6) | 4th (-44)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 41299)

https://www.stampedeblue.com/2017/11...r-the-bye-week

Just going to leave this here.

That's not a statistic. That's the author's supposition. Why is he referencing it as a statistic?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 41306)

That's not a statistic. That's the author's supposition. Why is he referencing it as a statistic?

You didn't even read the article. No wonder you are so off on what good coaches look like.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 41310)

You didn't even read the article. No wonder you are so off on what good coaches look like.

Yes, I did, but that's irrelevant. In or out of context, the conjecture that the author cites as a statistic in the snippet you quoted from the article is not, and cannot be, a statistic. Statistics are based on data, which are factual points of reference. The sentence which contains the "stat" he references begins with "In theory", which implies a hypothetical scenario. That can't produce a statistic, by the definitions of statistic and data.

To give another example, I could say that I believe Andrew Luck will be the 2018 NFL MVP, throw for over 5,000 yards and 50 TDs with a 10:1 or better TD:INT ratio, and lead the Colts to a 15-1 record and their second championship in Indianapolis. I cannot, however, say that any of that is a statistic, because it is also conjecture.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 41316)

You don't actually watch football do you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 41316)

Here are some stats from the article, which you clearly did not read:

Quote:

The Colts were 24-2 from 2012 to 2014 when leading at the half. From 2015 to the first 10 games of the 2017 season, the Colts are 13-10. The Colts have a -43 point differential in the Pagano era.

Quote:

The Colts have been abysmal at closing out games in 2017. The Colts have been outscored 171-61 in the 2nd half of games this season, including 110-28 in the 4th quarter.

Quote:

The Colts have held the halftime lead in 8 games this season and in the two games they did not hold the lead, they lost by a combined 64 points. The Colts are 3-5 when holding the halftime lead, which means that the Colts are more likely to lose when leading at the half.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 41327)

Here are some stats from the article, which you clearly did not read:

That fucker Grigson only signed guys that play 3 qtrs of football- but he fucking paid them like they played 4! Stupid Grigson, if he gave Chuck guys that played 4 quarters of football, we would be undefeated right now.

Go team Pagano!