Jordan Howard/Nagy vs. Urlacher/Trestman

[onebud34]

This is not a surprise...but you're making yourself look like a simpleton

 

[remydat]

This is not a surprise...but you're making yourself look like a Rory stan.

 

[Outlaw Josey Cutler]

Here let me make it easy. Whatever you are trying to say with the bold is wrong IMO. THe Bears still make the playoffs with Howard gone IMO. Sorry.

I tend to disagree. There were 3-4 games Howard carried the load last year and pounded the opposing defense giving Mitch a little more confidence in his play.

But that is a point worth discussing rather than when you break down an opposing poster's point by saying "No, it wasn't Howard it was Trubs [sic because what a stupid nickname] and the D." when he never said it wasn't the QB and the D!

It is very possible to DOUBT the Bears make the playoffs (certainly possible to doubt that they go 12-4 and clinch before the end of the reg season) without Howard's 3-4 good-great games ...

while also knowing that the primary reason for success last year was Mitch and the D. They are not self-contradictions.

You are so weird. You can focus on single words and terms and get as anal with language as a watchmaker with gears while losing all track of the general premise of the very person you are debating.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

Saying it is possible they miss the playoffs with Howard gone is suggesting that Howard was necessary to make the playoffs. Talk about trying to split hairs. You are clearly speculating that without Howard, we miss the playoffs and I am saying that is a pretty absurd position to take given his actual performance.

Yes. I'm not sure what was so confusing/infuriating to you this entire time. I said, verbatim, "I think its a possibility that the Bears miss the playoffs last year with Howard gone." There is no simpler way for me to communicate my thoughts...no clearer way to put it. There is nothing further I can do at this point...I can't make you 'more intelligent' or improve your comprehension skills.

I'm not saying that Howard was better or more important than Trubisky or "the D" (which, really, takes the cake in terms of sheer stupidity...a RB would be more important than the best defense in the league? In terms of trade value, would you trade the Bears' 11 defensive starters for, say, Joe Mixon?). I'm not saying that there is no chance the Bears make the playoffs without Howard. I'm saying you can't just assume that Howard's production is easily replaceable.

You disagree. Fine. But the fact that its taken you THIS LONG to finally grasp this elementary concept is hysterical. What if I said "The Cubs don't win the World Series without Miguel Montero." Would you respond with "Kris Bryant was better than Montero, and the starting rotation was more important in the Cubs success?"

Serious question. Is English your second language? Do you speak some other language as your primary language, and only use English when you are on CCS?

 

[Outlaw Josey Cutler]

This is not a surprise...but you're making yourself look like a simpleton

It's ironic because his error stems from trying to be smarter. Trying NOT to be a simpleton.

If Rory says it is possible the Bears don't make the playoffs without Howard, remy feels the need to show he is smarter and "educate others" in his posting so much that he LEAPS to saying Mitch and the D were bigger contributors missing the entire point altogether and making himself look dumb for not arguing why Howard himself was a non-factor in the playoff run.

It is one thing to disagree.

It is one thing to argue the ACTUAL point as in

"Well Rory I disagree. If you look at the film all of Howard's high YPC games came after Mitch had loosened the pass D with deep shots that missed and medium crossers that hit for big chunks. IMO Howard was even less of a factor in those high YPC games than his stats would suggest".

No, he twists the point Rory made in order to try to make Rory look foolish without addressing the point at all and loses so much credibility as a poster here imo.

 

[remydat]

I tend to disagree. There were 3-4 games Howard carried the load last year and pounded the opposing defense giving Mitch a little more confidence in his play.

But that is a point worth discussing rather than when you break down an opposing poster's point by saying "No, it wasn't Howard it was Trubs [sic because what a stupid nickname] and the D." when he never said it wasn't the QB and the D!

It is very possible to DOUBT the Bears make the playoffs (certainly possible to doubt that they go 12-4 and clinch before the end of the reg season) without Howard's 3-4 good-great games ...

while also knowing that the primary reason for success last year was Mitch and the D. They are not self-contradictions.

You are so weird. You can focus on single words and terms and get as anal with language as a watchmaker with gears while losing all track of the general premise of the very person you are debating.

Howard had 2 100 yard games so which games are you projecting we lose? Name the games and explain why Howard's replacement would not help us win?

Rams scored 6 points and Vikes 10 so think we win those without Howard so not seeing it.

 

[remydat]

Yes. I'm not sure what was so confusing/infuriating to you this entire time. I said, verbatim, "I think its a possibility that the Bears miss the playoffs last year with Howard gone." There is no simpler way for me to communicate my thoughts...no clearer way to put it. There is nothing further I can do at this point...I can't make you 'more intelligent' or improve your comprehension skills.

I'm not saying that Howard was better or more important than Trubisky or "the D" (which, really, takes the cake in terms of sheer stupidity...a RB would be more important than the best defense in the league? In terms of trade value, would you trade the Bears' 11 defensive starters for, say, Joe Mixon?). I'm not saying that there is no chance the Bears make the playoffs without Howard. I'm saying you can't just assume that Howard's production is easily replaceable.

You disagree. Fine. But the fact that its taken you THIS LONG to finally grasp this elementary concept is hysterical. What if I said "The Cubs don't win the World Series without Miguel Montero." Would you respond with "Kris Bryant was better than Montero, and the starting rotation was more important in the Cubs success?"

Serious question. Is English your second language? Do you speak some other language as your primary language, and only use English when you are on CCS?

You are confused. I pointed out the D and Trubs being the most important factors to say your possibility is extremely remote.

If English is your first language I would think that obvious. The whole point was Howard's contributions were not significant to result in us losing without him particularly when you factor in he would be replaced.

In his 2 best games the D totally dominated the Rams and Vikings so even without Howard we still win IMO.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

You are confused. I pointed out the D and Trubs being the most important factors to say your possibility is extremely remote.

If English is your first language I would think that obvious. The whole point was Howard's contributions were not significant to result in us losing without him particularly when you factor in he would be replaced.

In his 2 best games the D totally dominated the Rams and Vikings so even without Howard we still win IMO.

I admittedly am completely, utterly, irretrievably confused. It's like you are pretending as if this is a conversation, going forward to a conclusion. Your last 15 posts are all the exact same....the exact same idiocy...the exact same ending point....Jordan Howard, a RB, wasn't more important than a QB or the 11 starters on defense. Great! That is probably true of nearly every team in NFL history from 1978 to present day! Can you name a team that won a Super Bowl with a good RB, a bad QB, and a bad defense?

To whom are you speaking?! To what are you responding to?! How is your response relevant to anything that has been stated in this thread?!

 

[remydat]

Losing Jordan Howard and replacing him with another RB would not result in us missing the playoffs. That is all.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

Wow.

 

[onebud34]

Howard had 2 100 yard games so which games are you projecting we lose? Name the games and explain why Howard's replacement would not help us win?

Rams scored 6 points and Vikes 10 so think we win those without Howard so not seeing it.

Not sure why you post here if you can't even grasp the simplest of football concepts

 

[remydat]

Not sure why you post here if you can't even grasp the simplest of football concepts

Not sure why you post here when you offer nothing beyond what Rory has already said. I would have thought after his banning you would have developed some form of independent thinking but I guess you are more comfortable being one of his mouthpieces.

 

[onebud34]

It's a lot easier to agree with someone who has football knowledge vs someone who compares Brady to Dilfer.

Or makes a bold statement like the Bears make the playoffs in 2018 without Howard...then doesn't provide any credible data to support that statement.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

Or makes a bold statement like the Bears make the playoffs in 2018 without Howard...then doesn't provide any credible data to support that statement.

Even without a shred of supporting data or logic, at least his "bold statement" actually was relevant to the conversation.

 

[remydat]

It's a lot easier to agree with someone who has football knowledge vs someone who compares Brady to Dilfer.

Or makes a bold statement like the Bears make the playoffs in 2018 without Howard...then doesn't provide any credible data to support that statement.

Lol, I provided credible data. Howard had 2 100 yard games and in those games the D dominated and so entirely possible the Bears manage to score at least 7 or 11 points against the Rams and Vikings.

I also note that Rory provided no credible data to support his point about us possibly missing the playoffs but of course that doesn't bother you.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

Lol, I provided credible data. Howard had 2 100 yard games and in those games the D dominated and so entirely possible the Bears manage to score at least 7 or 11 points against the Rams and Vikings.

I also note that Rory provided no credible data to support his point about us possibly missing the playoffs but of course that doesn't bother you.

Howard had twice as many 100 yard games as Tarik Cohen and Allen Robinson combined. Tarik Cohen had 0 100-yard games. Allen Robinson had 1 100-yard game. Cool!

Football stats aren't linear, but even using your 'logic', it's still completely absurd. I would say that Cohen and Robinson were more important than Howard in terms of the Bears making the postseason in 2018, but following your reasoning, they weren't.

 

[remydat]

Howard had twice as many 100 yard games as Tarik Cohen and Allen Robinson combined. Tarik Cohen had 0 100-yard games. Allen Robinson had 1 100-yard game. Cool!

Football stats aren't linear, but even using your 'logic', it's still completely absurd. I would say that Cohen and Robinson were more important than Howard in terms of the Bears making the postseason in 2018, but following your reasoning, they weren't.

This is completely illogical. Cohen and ARob contributed in different ways while Howard has a very limited skill set.

Case in point. Cohen had 4 games where he had over 100 yards combined rushing and receiving while Howard had 3. That is with Cohen getting 100 less touches.

Howard also didn't do much to occupy the defenses attention as while Cohen represented a mismatch in the passing game, Howard did not attract 8 men in the box as he faced one of the lowest percentages of 8 men in the league (14%).

You are trying too hard here Rory.

 

[onebud34]

Lol, I provided credible data. Howard had 2 100 yard games and in those games the D dominated and so entirely possible the Bears manage to score at least 7 or 11 points against the Rams and Vikings.

That's not credible data...LOL!

There were 15 other games played.

I also note that Rory provided no credible data to support his point about us possibly missing the playoffs but of course that doesn't bother you.

That was all covered in the OP

 

[remydat]

That's not credible data...LOL!

There were 15 other games played.

That was all covered in the OP

In which he was largely even more ineffective so not sure your point. The OP didn't provide data. The OP speculated on a locker room effect he has no actual knowledge of. There is no data or stats in the OP.

Anyways, we going in circles. Time for Rory to call in the rest of the calvary and have FT delete or alter posts and then lock the thread. That is pretty much all that is left for this dead horse.

 

[onebud34]

In which he was largely even more ineffective so not sure your point. The OP didn't provide data. The OP speculated on a locker room effect he has no actual knowledge of. There is no data or stats in the OP.

So Trestman/Nagy had NFL HC experience prior to being hired by the Bears? Pace's overall record was impeccable prior to hiring Nagy? Urlacher played for the Bears in 2013? The Bears weren't 10-6 and missed the playoffs in 2012?