PFHOF Semifinalists

[King Kong]

Well, because I have a moment... (This new forum is very problematic. I usually cannot access it via my phone. I do not have this problem with any other site. I may not post often until this issue gets fixed.)



Look at Martin's statistics. Do you find it interesting that his Parcells' years, particularly 1996 and 1998, brought his career average per carry figure down? Those were arguably the best two teams for which he played. Hmmm. Hmmm.

(His injury-ruined season of 2005 also brought his career average down but most backs have a season like that at the end of their career.)

I assume this is directed at me. First, I share your phone-access frustration...I have about a 25% success rate of accessing the forum via my phone. Second, I agree with your analysis of Martin. Parcells used Martin to eat up clock, which affected his YPC. Is "eating up clock" indicative of a HOF RB?

It is not necessarily the case in either direction. I just think that is the way it was. Martin was on a team where this activity occurred. Barry Sanders or Emmitt Smith on the 1998 Jets instead? Sanders was better than Martin, so his average would likely have been better. Smith would've probably been below 4 just like Martin.

I must have seen at least 75% of all games where Bill Parcells coached. His teams, particularly when winning, would have numerous conservative run plays that were basically guaranteed to gain three or four yards insomuch that any play could be designed to guarantee yardage. Ottis Anderson was effective with paltry ypc numbers.

It begs looking into certainly. Putting aside 2005, why did Martin have his worst year with the Jets (according to ypc) on what was the best Jets team he played for? I don't remember him playing hurt in 1998 (2002 and 2005 were his difficult years in that department). The Jets did play with a lead a lot. Somebody would have to go into gamebooks to see if Martin had a lot of clock-killing conservative runs in 4th quarters of Jets victories. I do think there is something to it.

I have recently seen football numbers geeks (Chase Stuart and/or other people on Twitter) indicate that yardage per carry is overrated.

[oldecapecod11]

King Kong » Tue Dec 02, 2014 4:46 pm

King Kong wrote:
"Well, because I have a moment... (This new forum is very problematic. I usually cannot access it via my phone. I do not have this problem with any other site. I may not post often until this issue gets fixed.)
Look at Martin's statistics. Do you find it interesting that his Parcells' years, particularly 1996 and 1998, brought his career average per carry figure down? Those were arguably the best two teams for which he played. Hmmm. Hmmm.
(His injury-ruined season of 2005 also brought his career average down but most backs have a season like that at the end of their career.)"

Bryan wrote:
"I assume this is directed at me. First, I share your phone-access frustration...I have about a 25% success rate of accessing the forum via my phone. Second, I agree with your analysis of Martin. Parcells used Martin to eat up clock, which affected his YPC. Is "eating up clock" indicative of a HOF RB?"

Your two comments regarding connectivity problems here are far from isolated. There have been numerous issues and they are not just related to contact by telephone. Every form of device has seen a share of the problems. Please be assured it is the fault of neither your instrument nor your service. Personally, I am "disconnected" / "bounced" / "denied" or any number of terms used to decline my access. I have suspected a vindictiveness on the part of the bored directors because I am outspoken with my criticism of the capabilities of the website and the foolish - if not deceptive - manner by which it was chosen.
Every request I have made for an explanation or answer has been ignored.

Keep in mind, the former web site was operated very efficiently by one man - Ken Crippen - and it ran just fine. If there was a minor problem, there was even a place to voice that problem - a pinned thread at the top of the old forum.

Now, we have seven people scurrying about in seeming conflict with each other and the forum is a mess.
There is no attention given to a personal message or a thread created for help and there is no place to let the bored know of an issue.

Anyone that I have shown this to has said it is rather inefficient and that is the mildest of comments.

So, persist, my brothers, persist. Some day, we may see a well-run site and forum and maybe that day will come after the current conclavists apologize to the membership and plead with Ken to set the matter straight.

[James]

King Kong » Tue Dec 02, 2014 4:46 pm

King Kong wrote:
"Well, because I have a moment... (This new forum is very problematic. I usually cannot access it via my phone. I do not have this problem with any other site. I may not post often until this issue gets fixed.)
Look at Martin's statistics. Do you find it interesting that his Parcells' years, particularly 1996 and 1998, brought his career average per carry figure down? Those were arguably the best two teams for which he played. Hmmm. Hmmm.
(His injury-ruined season of 2005 also brought his career average down but most backs have a season like that at the end of their career.)"

Bryan wrote:
"I assume this is directed at me. First, I share your phone-access frustration...I have about a 25% success rate of accessing the forum via my phone. Second, I agree with your analysis of Martin. Parcells used Martin to eat up clock, which affected his YPC. Is "eating up clock" indicative of a HOF RB?"

Your two comments regarding connectivity problems here are far from isolated. There have been numerous issues and they are not just related to contact by telephone. Every form of device has seen a share of the problems. Please be assured it is the fault of neither your instrument nor your service. Personally, I am "disconnected" / "bounced" / "denied" or any number of terms used to decline my access. I have suspected a vindictiveness on the part of the bored directors because I am outspoken with my criticism of the capabilities of the website and the foolish - if not deceptive - manner by which it was chosen.
Every request I have made for an explanation or answer has been ignored.

Keep in mind, the former web site was operated very efficiently by one man - Ken Crippen - and it ran just fine. If there was a minor problem, there was even a place to voice that problem - a pinned thread at the top of the old forum.

Now, we have seven people scurrying about in seeming conflict with each other and the forum is a mess.
There is no attention given to a personal message or a thread created for help and there is no place to let the bored know of an issue.

Anyone that I have shown this to has said it is rather inefficient and that is the mildest of comments.

So, persist, my brothers, persist. Some day, we may see a well-run site and forum and maybe that day will come after the current conclavists apologize to the membership and plead with Ken to set the matter straight.

I too cannot connect most of the time, be it at work or at home, the majority of the time I cannot access the website or the forum....I miss the old site and forum...