| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Rolle vs Chaney |
| Brian Rolle |
|
25% |
[ 7 ] |
| Jamar Chaney |
|
75% |
[ 21 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 28 |
|
| Author |
Message |
babyatemydingo
Joined: 15 Jan 2007
Posts: 5912
Location: South Jersey
|
 Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 1:02 am Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| PowerElite wrote: | | babyatemydingo wrote: | | eaglesfan10 wrote: | | PowerElite wrote: | Alright, so most Eagles fans on FF are on the same page here. I just get frustrated reading articles and blogs stating that Rolle not only is going to be the starting WILL, but he was a "bright spot" amongst a bad linebacking core. Rolle was at the core of the problem. He just made some plays where Casey Matthews only got abused.
Now the stats are out about how poorly Rolle played.
| Quote: |
Brian Rolle and Nate Allen were tagged with 10 missed tackles apiece. Among linebackers with a minimum of 50 tackles, Tampa's Quincy Black was the worst with a missed tackle rate of 17.2 percent. However, Rolle didn't qualify because he was only credited with 44 tackles. If he had been eligible, he would have been worse than Black with an 18.5 percent missed tackle rate. I like Rolle and think he was actually one of the team's better linebackers last year, but that number is alarming.
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles/Five-Eagles-numbers-that-matter.html |
Jamar Chaney and Casey Matthews advanced statistics can be found here
http://mcnabborkolb.com/post/19733847383/tackling-eagles-linebackers-vs-demeco-ryans |
Numbers can be skewed. By watching the Cardinals game alone will prove that. Rolle was lined up 1 on 1 against Larry Fitzgerald in the Red Zone with a predictable outcome.
Numbers are always right though.  |
On numbers:
Numbers don't lie.
But, people do.
It is in the interpretation of statistics that misinformation occurs.
Often not accounted for are the variables that occur in conjunction with any given set of statistics.
It is the old "4 out of 5 dentists recommend sugarless gum for their patients who chew gum" theory.
It is a meaningless claim without examining the variables and most certainly does not lead to the obvious conclusion that you should chew Trident.
The same sort of ambiguity applies to most printed football statistics.
Note: I reserve the right to quote football statistics myself from time to time.
I simply challenge others to find the flaws in my methodology or concede that I am correct. |
But wouldn't the inherent flaws in recording these statistics be the same for all players?
Your dentist survey at its core is opinion based. Think about it. |
"But wouldn't the inherent flaws in recording these statistics be the same for all players?"
Not even my point, but another layer of mystique to this all.
Equality in the formation of the statistics would require that the scenarios be identical. They are not. Every play has its nuances.
Furthermore, viewers can't help but project their individual prejudices when making these sorts of determinations.
Does a player like Patrick Willis or Ray Lewis get a pass on a marginal missed tackle under the supposition that if they didn't make the tackle nobody would have whereas players like Kavell Connor and DeAndre Levy are not afforded the same courtesy?
What really constitutes a missed tackle?
Clearly if you square up against a guy and he runs you over it is a missed tackle.
After that it is somewhat subjective.
How many missed tackles are there on this play?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynn7VGY2Asc
In fact, none of that was even my point, but merely further compounds the issue.
My actual point was that the assignment of a meaning to said statistics is often misappropriated.
One of the great misjudgements of our recent times has been the perceived link between vaccinations and autism.
People assume a causal link because the symptoms of autism often appear soon after vaccinations.
However, the onset of autism naturally coincides with the time frame when vaccinations are given.
In fact, there is no relationship whatsoever according to all of the research done using scientific method.
Is is an unaccounted for variable.
Getting back to football...
So, if a defensive back is dropping into coverage in the red zone and his teammate picks up the wrong receiver forcing him to make an unanticipated switch, the receiver blows past him before he can change direction and the defensive back winds up trailing him by four yards into the end zone did he really give up a red zone touchdown?
Is there any way of crediting it against his teammate who was on the other side of the field by this time?
Again, there is an unaccounted for variable here.
How do those factor in to the grand scheme, if at all?
I think it is a bit dangerous to take all of these number at face value and fasten an opinion to them.
We don't really know how they come about.
"Your dentist survey at its core is opinion based. Think about it."
Whether or not the survey is opinion based or not is irrelevant.
It is the flaws in the methodology and the conclusion drawn.
"4 out of 5 dentists surveyed..."
How many is that exactly? 4 out of 5? 400 out of 500? 960 out of 1,200?
Is the sample size large enough to provide statistics significant beyond the .05 level, not having occurred by chance?
"...recommend sugarless gum..."
Not Trident, just sugarless gum.
They may actually have a negative opinion of Trident, but you would never know it by the way it is presented.
"...for their patients who chew gum."
That caveat speaks volumes to me.
No dentist may recommend chewing gum.
But, if they must it should be sugarless. Duh.
I know, it is an analogy, but I used to illustrated the need for some skepticism of the origination of any set of statistics.
Is the sample size significant?
Are there additional variables influencing the outcome?
Is there a caveat placed anywhere among the analysis?
Do the statistics have the meaning that is being attributed to them?
Metrics are great and often very interesting, but the more esoteric they become the more likely they are wrought with unintended errors.
That was all I was saying.
Also, if anybody questioned it before, I can talk football, statistics AND chew gum at the same time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
EaglesFan5-36-81
Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 13998
Location: Sig by Eagles_808
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 6:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| babyatemydingo wrote: | | PowerElite wrote: | | babyatemydingo wrote: | | eaglesfan10 wrote: | | PowerElite wrote: | Alright, so most Eagles fans on FF are on the same page here. I just get frustrated reading articles and blogs stating that Rolle not only is going to be the starting WILL, but he was a "bright spot" amongst a bad linebacking core. Rolle was at the core of the problem. He just made some plays where Casey Matthews only got abused.
Now the stats are out about how poorly Rolle played.
| Quote: |
Brian Rolle and Nate Allen were tagged with 10 missed tackles apiece. Among linebackers with a minimum of 50 tackles, Tampa's Quincy Black was the worst with a missed tackle rate of 17.2 percent. However, Rolle didn't qualify because he was only credited with 44 tackles. If he had been eligible, he would have been worse than Black with an 18.5 percent missed tackle rate. I like Rolle and think he was actually one of the team's better linebackers last year, but that number is alarming.
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles/Five-Eagles-numbers-that-matter.html |
Jamar Chaney and Casey Matthews advanced statistics can be found here
http://mcnabborkolb.com/post/19733847383/tackling-eagles-linebackers-vs-demeco-ryans |
Numbers can be skewed. By watching the Cardinals game alone will prove that. Rolle was lined up 1 on 1 against Larry Fitzgerald in the Red Zone with a predictable outcome.
Numbers are always right though. |
On numbers:
Numbers don't lie.
But, people do.
It is in the interpretation of statistics that misinformation occurs.
Often not accounted for are the variables that occur in conjunction with any given set of statistics.
It is the old "4 out of 5 dentists recommend sugarless gum for their patients who chew gum" theory.
It is a meaningless claim without examining the variables and most certainly does not lead to the obvious conclusion that you should chew Trident.
The same sort of ambiguity applies to most printed football statistics.
Note: I reserve the right to quote football statistics myself from time to time.
I simply challenge others to find the flaws in my methodology or concede that I am correct. |
But wouldn't the inherent flaws in recording these statistics be the same for all players?
Your dentist survey at its core is opinion based. Think about it. |
"But wouldn't the inherent flaws in recording these statistics be the same for all players?"
Not even my point, but another layer of mystique to this all.
Equality in the formation of the statistics would require that the scenarios be identical. They are not. Every play has its nuances.
Furthermore, viewers can't help but project their individual prejudices when making these sorts of determinations.
Does a player like Patrick Willis or Ray Lewis get a pass on a marginal missed tackle under the supposition that if they didn't make the tackle nobody would have whereas players like Kavell Connor and DeAndre Levy are not afforded the same courtesy?
What really constitutes a missed tackle?
Clearly if you square up against a guy and he runs you over it is a missed tackle.
After that it is somewhat subjective.
How many missed tackles are there on this play?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynn7VGY2Asc
In fact, none of that was even my point, but merely further compounds the issue.
My actual point was that the assignment of a meaning to said statistics is often misappropriated.
One of the great misjudgements of our recent times has been the perceived link between vaccinations and autism.
People assume a causal link because the symptoms of autism often appear soon after vaccinations.
However, the onset of autism naturally coincides with the time frame when vaccinations are given.
In fact, there is no relationship whatsoever according to all of the research done using scientific method.
Is is an unaccounted for variable.
Getting back to football...
So, if a defensive back is dropping into coverage in the red zone and his teammate picks up the wrong receiver forcing him to make an unanticipated switch, the receiver blows past him before he can change direction and the defensive back winds up trailing him by four yards into the end zone did he really give up a red zone touchdown?
Is there any way of crediting it against his teammate who was on the other side of the field by this time?
Again, there is an unaccounted for variable here.
How do those factor in to the grand scheme, if at all?
I think it is a bit dangerous to take all of these number at face value and fasten an opinion to them.
We don't really know how they come about.
"Your dentist survey at its core is opinion based. Think about it."
Whether or not the survey is opinion based or not is irrelevant.
It is the flaws in the methodology and the conclusion drawn.
"4 out of 5 dentists surveyed..."
How many is that exactly? 4 out of 5? 400 out of 500? 960 out of 1,200?
Is the sample size large enough to provide statistics significant beyond the .05 level, not having occurred by chance?
"...recommend sugarless gum..."
Not Trident, just sugarless gum.
They may actually have a negative opinion of Trident, but you would never know it by the way it is presented.
"...for their patients who chew gum."
That caveat speaks volumes to me.
No dentist may recommend chewing gum.
But, if they must it should be sugarless. Duh.
I know, it is an analogy, but I used to illustrated the need for some skepticism of the origination of any set of statistics.
Is the sample size significant?
Are there additional variables influencing the outcome?
Is there a caveat placed anywhere among the analysis?
Do the statistics have the meaning that is being attributed to them?
Metrics are great and often very interesting, but the more esoteric they become the more likely they are wrought with unintended errors.
That was all I was saying.
Also, if anybody questioned it before, I can talk football, statistics AND chew gum at the same time. |
Can you walk while accomplishing the other tasks?
I love Rolle, but I think Chaney on the weakside would go back to the playmaker he was in late 2010 when he was placed in the middle after Bradley got hurt. Remember, at the time we were running a 2 gap defensive line allowing Jamar to run around and make plays. He will get the opportunity to do the same on the weakside, and we all know Chaney is good in coverage and keeps our OLBs from being too undersized. It got different for Chaney behind the wide-9 in the middle because he was asked to take on more blocks, and thats not his game, lucky for us we now have a MIKE that can do that in DeMeco Ryans.
Rolle comes in as a special teams demon and a subpackage player as a blitzer. You could say Casey has the same role as Rolle as well, but Brian is a better football player so will likely see the field more. If we keep 6 linebackers I'm guessing the last guy to make it is Akeem Jordan, he always seems to make the team and not look bad when on the field. Fokou is the 7th guy if we decide to carry 7.
Thats my early take on the LB position.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nlesthought
Joined: 21 Feb 2007
Posts: 7604
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 9:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | nlesthought wrote: | Rolle.
And who ever said Chaney because he's taller, really? That's what a 1 inch difference? |
It's 2.5 inch. And we have the shortest LB Core in the league. |
Regardless, what does that have to do with playing LB?
_________________
psn: nlesthought l Peppers90 on the sig
| Phire wrote: | | Brady, Rodgers, or Manning will win this Super Bowl. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RainbowCarebear
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 22688
Location: Avenging his brother by slaying three of Prince Rhaegar's bannermen and later Rodrik Greyjoy
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 10:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| nlesthought wrote: | | RainbowCarebear wrote: | | nlesthought wrote: | Rolle.
And who ever said Chaney because he's taller, really? That's what a 1 inch difference? |
It's 2.5 inch. And we have the shortest LB Core in the league. |
Regardless, what does that have to do with playing LB? |
Nothing really, but I would just prefer to add some size to our D. Talent > Size. But Talent and a little Size 
Again if Rolle wins the WLB, I won't be hammering my fist into the wall, but I would prefer Clayton, Chaney or maybe even Matthews, simply due to size.
_________________
"Of gold and silver and gemstones, it had none; bronze and iron were the metals of winter"
"He is part of you, Robb. To fear him is to fear you."
"These are northmen, Uncle. The north remembers." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PowerElite
Joined: 25 Dec 2009
Posts: 7624
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| nlesthought wrote: |
Regardless, what does that have to do with playing LB? |
Length has a lot to do with playing linebacker. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nlesthought
Joined: 21 Feb 2007
Posts: 7604
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| PowerElite wrote: | | nlesthought wrote: |
Regardless, what does that have to do with playing LB? |
Length has a lot to do with playing linebacker. |
vertical length or arm length?
_________________
psn: nlesthought l Peppers90 on the sig
| Phire wrote: | | Brady, Rodgers, or Manning will win this Super Bowl. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PowerElite
Joined: 25 Dec 2009
Posts: 7624
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| nlesthought wrote: | | PowerElite wrote: | | nlesthought wrote: |
Regardless, what does that have to do with playing LB? |
Length has a lot to do with playing linebacker. |
vertical length or arm length? |
Vertical length? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eagles_808
Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 24775
Location: Torrance, CA
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| PowerElite wrote: | | Vertical length? |
His height...
_________________
insignia by McNabbNo5 | #championCHIP | #Sparkles |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LOLKevinKolb
Joined: 25 Jan 2011
Posts: 6873
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 12:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Brian Rolle was the starting WILL in camp today...
1st day of OTAs mean everything
You heard it here first
_________________
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | And use the boners for soup to survive through the winter |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RainbowCarebear
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 22688
Location: Avenging his brother by slaying three of Prince Rhaegar's bannermen and later Rodrik Greyjoy
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| LOLKevinKolb wrote: | Brian Rolle was the starting WILL in camp today...
1st day of OTAs mean everything
You heard it here first |
I saw it on PE.com before this! 
_________________
"Of gold and silver and gemstones, it had none; bronze and iron were the metals of winter"
"He is part of you, Robb. To fear him is to fear you."
"These are northmen, Uncle. The north remembers." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phire
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 39196
Location: #championchip 2012 HoF
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Sounds like Chaney is participating but still might be recovering.
Don't want to rush back from any neck surgery, you certainly don't want to risk it in optional camps.
_________________
 | theuntouchable wrote: | | Think about this phire. I am the real chow. |
| stevec0008 wrote: | | I read all the time, and laugh, a lot. Mostly at oland. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RainbowCarebear
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 22688
Location: Avenging his brother by slaying three of Prince Rhaegar's bannermen and later Rodrik Greyjoy
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Phire wrote: | Sounds like Chaney is participating but still might be recovering.
Don't want to rush back from any neck surgery, you certainly don't want to risk it in optional camps. |
It's no contact. So I doubt a injury like his is a major problem.
_________________
"Of gold and silver and gemstones, it had none; bronze and iron were the metals of winter"
"He is part of you, Robb. To fear him is to fear you."
"These are northmen, Uncle. The north remembers." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phire
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 39196
Location: #championchip 2012 HoF
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Phire wrote: | Sounds like Chaney is participating but still might be recovering.
Don't want to rush back from any neck surgery, you certainly don't want to risk it in optional camps. |
It's no contact. So I doubt a injury like his is a major problem. |
Yeah it wouldn't be a major problem, but something to note nonetheless.
Even if it's non-contact you're engaging in physical activity with moving bodies all around, if you have a recovering neck you want to be careful because freak accidents/injuries happen every year.
_________________
| theuntouchable wrote: | | Think about this phire. I am the real chow. |
| stevec0008 wrote: | | I read all the time, and laugh, a lot. Mostly at oland. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Withmy89vision
Joined: 07 Aug 2007
Posts: 2717
|
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 6:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Phire wrote: | | RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Phire wrote: | Sounds like Chaney is participating but still might be recovering.
Don't want to rush back from any neck surgery, you certainly don't want to risk it in optional camps. |
It's no contact. So I doubt a injury like his is a major problem. |
Yeah it wouldn't be a major problem, but something to note nonetheless.
Even if it's non-contact you're engaging in physical activity with moving bodies all around, if you have a recovering neck you want to be careful because freak accidents/injuries happen every year. |
What is Chaney's injury? With my pinched nerve, if I seriously exert myself I get a real sharp headache in the center of my forehead that doesn't go away all day and it's absolutely crippling.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phire
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 39196
Location: #championchip 2012 HoF
|
| Posted: Wed May 23, 2012 5:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
http://www.philadelphiaeagles.com/news/article-1/Chaney-May-The-Best-Man-Win/7904ad46-86e6-4587-bb25-d12e4c3d36f4
| Quote: | | Chaney was not expected to take part in the Organized Team Activities because of the offseason neck procedure he underwent, but when the Organized Team Activities began on Tuesday at the NovaCare Complex he was out there on the field. |
| Quote: | | Chaney said he wasn't with the starters, but instead competing against Brian Rolle for the weakside linebacker job. It's the one linebacker spot where Chaney hasn't started in his first two seasons. |
| Quote: | | "May the best man win if it's just me and him battling it out." |
_________________
| theuntouchable wrote: | | Think about this phire. I am the real chow. |
| stevec0008 wrote: | | I read all the time, and laugh, a lot. Mostly at oland. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
