Causation vs. Correlation

xer0h0ur

HS Referee HoF
Donator
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
22,260
Liked Posts:
17,824
Location:
Chicago, IL.
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Holy fuck you're still rambling?
 

JDB_219

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jan 19, 2013
Posts:
3,958
Liked Posts:
856
Seriously guys Lovie and Tice just didn't have the pieces. Forte in the passing game? I mean come on that's a terrible idea. Running backs need to stick to running the ball.

You do know he caught 44 balls right?
 

JDB_219

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jan 19, 2013
Posts:
3,958
Liked Posts:
856
I am not disputing that. But to be fair, fans in all cities are overreacting right now. For example, Philly fans were "expecting" a super bowl after ONE week of Chip Kelly's new offense. They then lost to a west coast team playing in the Eastern time zone early - hard to do.

Bear fans are happy because they see their QB on his feet, and they have to credit somebody.

My history professor used a term I haven't heard elsewhere (except from his students in relating the story): Multiple factors of causation.

The Bears are 2-0 for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is Emery's reconstruction of the Off Line. (Which according to PFF, has been below average!)

Are people taking dumps on Andy Reid almost reflexively? He is an interesting comparison, long time guy who won a lot but overstayed his welcome.
 

HeHateMe

He/Himz/Hiz
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
56,203
Liked Posts:
61,375
Disagree with this post. The first infinite post loop in message board history was created a few days ago by BearsBud...

Post #1: Has an author ever been so wrong??? He said Ditka never played in the Black & Blue Division!
Post #2: Wait...you're saying that Ditka never played in the Black & Blue Division?! That can't be right, because thats not what the author said!

Repeat times infinity

But that was caused by two parties. Not to give any less credence to the awe inspired by that particular thread, but if this thread were to play out as Malcore suggests it might trump the ridiculousness of Bearsbud's...
 

Mr. Jones

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 22, 2012
Posts:
4,438
Liked Posts:
1,123
I don't recall reading that or hearing that anywhere.

That being said, the offense is better and I mean much better. If Lovie was here I have to assume Tice would be here, nuff said.
Lovie should have done better in hiring a coordinator for the offense. Someone like Trestman, but I think Lovie would have never hired someone capable of moving into his HC position, hence all the old cast offs he recruited.
 

Mr. Jones

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 22, 2012
Posts:
4,438
Liked Posts:
1,123
I would assume Martz would be considered an OC capable of moving into the HC position, considering he was a SB coach at one point.

Circular problem...one, the Bears offensive talent had drained to the point that no one really wanted the job, and its doubtful a strong OC would agree to join a staff that was annually rumored to be one step away from dismissal.
Well I wouldn't say the offensive talent was drained...under Angelo and Lovie it wasn't that great to begin with. I'm willing to bet
had Emery taken over as GM a few years earlier, he would have tried to get Lovie the offensive players he needed, and helped recruit a guy to run an offense. This is assuming Lovie would have cooperated with Emery and gotten off his high horse. Lovie appeared to be stubborn and set in his ways, and that may be why no one seemed to want to come to Chicago.

Martz was not a good candidate for HC, he was another outdated castoff that the Bears under Lovie had to hire.
 

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
41,509
Liked Posts:
23,807
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Once again, Bushrod gets a penalty a little over once ever 3 games, Garza, once every 4 games, and Slauson once ever 8 games. If we go by snaps, Bushrod is once every 188 snaps, Garza once every 268 snaps and Slauson once every 417 snaps. The Bears are at 131 snaps this year.

What is hard to understand? Based on their historical averages, none of them should have committed a false start yet. I repeat, none of them should have committed a false start. Bushrod has 57 more snaps to go, Garza, 137 more snaps and Slauson a whopping 286 more snaps. So 3 out of 5 guys would not have committed a penalty based on their rate of committing such penalties lasy year. That is not surprising. That is the basic math of their historical performance.

As for the rookies, well we have no data to track it so again, there is no proof for none of this shit you guys are going on about.

Finally I asked for someone to explain why a new QB, system, or players affects the snap count. How does any of that affect them remembering the snap count that is said in the huddle?

Cadence, thinking about the new plays, Rookies trying to figure our what they're facing assignment wise for the 1st time vs D alignment, etc. Again, nothing tangible but common sense should rule.

We should be below average under the current circumstances. The league median # of false starts last year was 18. Average that out over 16 games and get back to me. Top ten teams averaged 14.5. If you're going to take the math approach, I guess you think we should average well under 8. 5 would make it likely not to have one in the1st 2 games. It's a silly concept with too small a sample size but if you want to got there, you're just digging a hole.

I'm done.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,086
Liked Posts:
38,097
I have a few thoughts on this. When I played football, and this held true on every level, whenever a backup player came into the game, especially if it was an OL or DL, he would invariably jump offside or false start as soon as he got in. I would assume it was in part due to unfamiliarity and/or being unsure about one's assignment...but you bring up an interesting point. Perhaps these backup players all had memory and/or hearing issues...which also explain in part why they weren't as good as the first string players.

In regards to the Bears and the affect of coaching on pre-snap penalties, I will say a couple things. First, Tice was one of my least favorite coaches of all-time, and loathed him getting "credit" for improving his OL from the worst in NFL history to merely the worst in the NFL. Tice was always shuffling around his lineups, even in training camp, having different combinations and guys playing multiple positions. When there is no continuity, there are bound to be more pre-snap penalties because guys aren't really focused on "snap counts", they are trying to remember their assignments. I thought Tice's inability to settle on a starting 5 really hurt the Bears in pre-snap penalties.

Second, Martz's system was a great source of pre-snap penalites. One, his playcall language was so slow and verbose, the Bears had to run to the LOS just to get the snap off. This would cause more pre-snap penalties as the timing of breaking the huddle, lining up, making line calls, etc. is completely off. Two, Martz did not allow for Cutler to audible, so if the formation was bad or the play was bad, it was up to Garza to make a multitude of line calls just to make the play work. Constantly changing assignments at the LOS would lead to more pre-snap penalties, because, again, players are focused on things other than snap count.

But your theory could also be true...perhaps the NFL is littered with OLs who have hearing issues.

I think the Bears inability to actually draft good players caused a lot of pre snap penalties. Less talented players and players who have focus/intelligence issues are more likely to be concerned that they don't have the ability to defend Jared Allen or Geno Atkins so they try to get off the line as quickly as possible in order to get any kind of advantage. Further crowd noise most definitely causes false starts.

I mean let's make this simple. Do people honestly think if Webb (14 penalities), Rachel (8 in 8 games), and Carimi (10 in 12 games) were still here that we would have no pre snap penalties? Sorry I think we are comparing apples to organges here. There is a reason those guys are not here.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,086
Liked Posts:
38,097
Cadence, thinking about the new plays, Rookies trying to figure our what they're facing assignment wise for the 1st time vs D alignment, etc. Again, nothing tangible but common sense should rule.

We should be below average under the current circumstances. The league median # of false starts last year was 18. Average that out over 16 games and get back to me. Top ten teams averaged 14.5. If you're going to take the math approach, I guess you think we should average well under 8. 5 would make it likely not to have one in the1st 2 games. It's a silly concept with too small a sample size but if you want to got there, you're just digging a hole.

I'm done.

So prove it. As I said, compare rookie starting OL penalties and see if Long and Mills perform better or worse over the course of this year. Right now you are making a generic assumption that just because they are rookies it means they should struggle. It still doesn't prove the lack of penalties is not due to their own talent and intellgience (see below) but it would make for a better argument than just blindly saying they are rookies.

Long missed a lot of OTAs because his college class hadn't graduated yet then shows up to TC and within a couple of weeks is mauling people all over the fucking field. I didn't see much of a learning curve. I saw a guy who from the time he stepped on the field was ready for prime time and I thought that is what most people here thought as well.

So I am confused how everyone is singing his praises all other times but then for the purpose of this one discussion think that the lack of penalties on his part is due mostly to coaching and not to the fact that when that mofo steps on the field he fears no one and is one of the fastest OL in the league. When you have that much strength and that much natural explosion, you don't need to anticpate the snap count because you know you have the talent to get it done without seeking an artificial advantage.
 

ClydeLee

New member
Joined:
Jun 29, 2010
Posts:
14,829
Liked Posts:
4,113
Location:
The OP
So prove it. As I said, compare rookie starting OL penalties and see if the Long and Mills have performed better or worse over the course of this year. Right now you are making a generic assumption that just because they are rookies it means they should struggle.

If Long is this once in a generation talent that people think he is and if he is an intelligent player then there is little reason for me to just blindly assume he should struggle as if it is impossible for a talented rookie OL not to commit penalties.

One... Who said that abiut Kyle Long? You want people to prove something, do you have any quote of someone saying such a comment.

Its reasonable to expect inexperienced people will perform inexperienced... That's the case with Long and Mills, and not just NFL wise but from slim play/low tier gimmicky play.

Fucking A on Tapatalk
 

xer0h0ur

HS Referee HoF
Donator
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
22,260
Liked Posts:
17,824
Location:
Chicago, IL.
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Sure, just conveniently ignore the fact Long is short on experience.
 

Bear Pride

Bears Gonna Shock the World!
Joined:
Aug 28, 2012
Posts:
10,616
Liked Posts:
3,075
Seriously guys Lovie and Tice just didn't have the pieces. Forte in the passing game? I mean come on that's a terrible idea. Running backs need to stick to running the ball.
WTF are you talking about. Not only is Forte great at catching the ball out of the backfield, the swing pass to the RB is a staple of the WC offense, which is what the Bears are running now!
 

HeHateMe

He/Himz/Hiz
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
56,203
Liked Posts:
61,375
Are those totals all pre-snap penalties???

I think if Webb, Rachel, & Carimi were still here there would be fewer pre snap penalties in 2013 than in 2012...which is kind of the whole point.

I was looking at the offensive pre-snap penalty total from 2012...the Bears had quite a few (29), but they still had less than teams like SF (32), Baltimore (33), and Seattle (39). So the logical conclusion, according to you, is that those teams in 2012 had less talented players than the 2012 Bears. Gotcha.

Stats don't lie.
 

xer0h0ur

HS Referee HoF
Donator
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
22,260
Liked Posts:
17,824
Location:
Chicago, IL.
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Are those totals all pre-snap penalties???

I think if Webb, Rachel, & Carimi were still here there would be fewer pre snap penalties in 2013 than in 2012...which is kind of the whole point.

I was looking at the offensive pre-snap penalty total from 2012...the Bears had quite a few (29), but they still had less than teams like SF (32), Baltimore (33), and Seattle (39). So the logical conclusion, according to you, is that those teams in 2012 had less talented players than the 2012 Bears. Gotcha.

Apparently they have stupid offensive linemen :parrot:
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,086
Liked Posts:
38,097
Are those totals all pre-snap penalties???

I think if Webb, Rachel, & Carimi were still here there would be fewer pre snap penalties in 2013 than in 2012...which is kind of the whole point.

I was looking at the offensive pre-snap penalty total from 2012...the Bears had quite a few (29), but they still had less than teams like SF (32), Baltimore (33), and Seattle (39). So the logical conclusion, according to you, is that those teams in 2012 had less talented players than the 2012 Bears. Gotcha.

No they are not all pre-snap. And fine you think they would but then there is no way to prove it nor have you or anyone else tried to provide stats to prove it. It should just be accepted on faith.

And by your logic because you think Trestman would have reduced their penalties then are you saying that Trestman is a better coach than Jim and John Harbaugh, and Pete Carrol after just two games since he apparently would have reduced the numbers below those teams?

Realistically we would have to drill down on the numbers to really analyze. Crowd noise is a major factor and SF has to play in Seattle for example which is the loudest stadium in the league. And who are the players that committed these penalties and when did they do it? SF is a much better run blocking team than pass blocking. If a lot of their penalties are from pass blocking then those players could certainly feel like on passing players they need to get a better jump.

So no I am not saying it makes the Bears better because I don't know the particular circumstances that gave rise to the penalities. As I explained to Malcore when you aggregate data (at a team level) instead of at an individual level and without looking at specific circumstances, you are prone to arrive at erroneous conclusions. So sorry Rory, try again.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,086
Liked Posts:
38,097
One... Who said that abiut Kyle Long? You want people to prove something, do you have any quote of someone saying such a comment.

Its reasonable to expect inexperienced people will perform inexperienced... That's the case with Long and Mills, and not just NFL wise but from slim play/low tier gimmicky play.

Fucking A on Tapatalk

I already edited my post. I defintiely recall posters anointing Kyle Long as one of the most talented rookie lineman they have seen. If you don't recall posters making such statements then fine. Am I going to look for quotes from posters. No. But then I am not going to dispute the fact that I have not provided a quote if you honestly don't remember it. That is the difference. I don't expect people to except stuff as fact if I don't feel like providing proof. All I have asked is for people to prove their statements and instead of just saying they can't or won't they just keep repeating it.
 

ClydeLee

New member
Joined:
Jun 29, 2010
Posts:
14,829
Liked Posts:
4,113
Location:
The OP
I already edited my post. I defintiely recall posters anointing Kyle Long as one of the most talented rookie lineman they have seen. If you don't recall posters making such statements then fine. Am I going to look for quotes from posters. No. But then I am not going to dispute the fact that I have not provided a quote if you honestly don't remember it. That is the difference. I don't expect people to except stuff as fact if I don't feel like providing proof. All I have asked is for people to prove their statements and instead of just saying they can't or won't they just keep repeating it.

Yet you are already shifting the post of your claims.

I actually bet if a poster here said, Long is the best rookie linemen they've ever seen... They were being completely honest and likely accurate. I wouldn't expect them to have been watching other teams rookies much. That's comparing Long to a very weak rookie linemen showing for more than a decade.

I'm not a fan if people not backing up comments, but less of a fan of making proclamations on what others say or believe that sound more like generalizations than reality.

Fucking A on Tapatalk
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,086
Liked Posts:
38,097
Sure, just conveniently ignore the fact Long is short on experience.

The problem here is overcoming inexperience is a combination of the player having innate talent and yes some measure of coaching but you guys seem to be thinking it is all coaching. I am saying there is no way to quantify how much of Long's lack of penalties is coaching and how much of it is him just being a talented guy.

If you want to believe it is mostly coaching then fine. I simply said that can't be proven and I lean towards it being mostly the players. We are really at an impasse until someone can provide some measure of evidence but some people will continue to discuss as if their opinion is 100% fact.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,086
Liked Posts:
38,097
Yet you are already shifting the post of your claims.

I actually bet if a poster here said, Long is the best rookie linemen they've ever seen... They were being completely honest and likely accurate. I wouldn't expect them to have been watching other teams rookies much. That's comparing Long to a very weak rookie linemen showing for more than a decade.

Fucking A on Tapatalk

What claim have I shifted? Whenever I make a post, I reread it and in this case you quoted the inital 2 paragraph post and I edited it and it is now 3 paragraphs and I removed what I thought was the hyperbole and added the extra paragraph to more fully explain my point. That was done before I even read your post.

So yes I am agreeing that the first part was hyperbole which is why I changed it. I am responded to a bunch of different people and do so rapidly and then revisit and revise if necessary. Care point, I just added this second paragraph to further clarify.
 

Top