Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Tim Harper
Originally posted by Malvado

We held Chicago to 36 points, you really think DC is going to put up 60 on us?

I held Chicago to 36 points.

I haven't ran the score up on anyone yet this season.

I was about to say the same thing. Not to sound high and mighty but we could have demolished you and ran you off the field. But Tim is nice and we didn't

Originally posted by Tim Harper
Originally posted by Malvado

We held Chicago to 36 points, you really think DC is going to put up 60 on us?

I held Chicago to 36 points.

I haven't ran the score up on anyone yet this season.

Cause you dont have a good enough team to run up a score

Originally posted by Malvado
Originally posted by chad13

15) Mozilla Firefox
Coach: cwrujosh
Record: 0-6-0
Best Win: N/A
Next Game Prediction: 60-0 loss to D.C. Warpath
Notes: They’ve yet to come within 10 points of their opponents in any of their games. Relegation seems to be the destiny of this team. At least they’ll probably get a win over the Gearheads.



We held Chicago to 36 points, you really think DC is going to put up 60 on us?

WOW One game your Defense wasnt completely lousy it just sucked bad. Cookies for everyone on D. Ya the Warpath could easily put up 60 on you but I will say the score will be 48-3. You guys suck and we are as good as any team. Even the two games we lost we not by any means easy wins and that was against two of the best teams in all of GLB!

We've had 6 points scored on us this season. We're also trying to break our record from last year on most negative rushing yards allowed (currently at -124 yards this season).

Originally posted by Jed
We've had 6 points scored on us this season. We're also trying to break our record from last year on most negative rushing yards allowed (currently at -124 yards this season).

Can you provide a link to that stat?

Originally posted by The Strategy Expert

Can you provide a link to that stat?

Which one? From last season?

Either, but I'll save you the time, the answer is he cannot. Sack yards count against passing yardage for team totals not rushing yards. And yes I realize that GLB's stat reporting system counts sack yards against running totals but that is not a logical way to report the data, and it is also inconsistent with the NFL which deducts sack yards from team passing yards, however QB personal stats remain the same with respect to his total passing yardage he has earned.

In NCAA, they report the numbers off of rushing totals, but you can't validate a stat based upon the NCAA doing something that doesn't make any sense.

Originally posted by The Strategy Expert
Either, but I'll save you the time, the answer is he cannot. Sack yards count against passing yardage for team totals not rushing yards. And yes I realize that GLB's stat reporting system counts sack yards against running totals but that is not a logical way to report the data, and it is also inconsistent with the NFL which deducts sack yards from team passing yards, however QB personal stats remain the same with respect to his total passing yardage he has earned.

In NCAA, they report the numbers off of rushing totals, but you can't validate a stat based upon the NCAA doing something that doesn't make any sense.

Well, yeah, true, but no one is arguing the validity of the stat. As the game tabulates it, we allowed -84 rushing yards last season, and -124 this season is all he said, and didn't attach a valuating statement to it.

If you wanted to, and took out the negative sack yardage, we've allowed 41 yards on the ground this season, 57.5 coming in one game that has, thus far, been an aberration. We've had as many rushers (HBs, backup HBs, FBs, etc.) have a positive rushing total against us as have had negative totals, and only one was over 14 positive yards. Zero TDs, only one in the past two seasons (damn you, MJD).

The -124 is just for fun, sure, but we don't need it to demonstrate we're a dominant run D. It's been that way for two seasons. Just ask Tim or Chad about how their HBs have done against us.

Originally posted by Jed
We've had 6 points scored on us this season. We're also trying to break our record from last year on most negative rushing yards allowed (currently at -124 yards this season).

ANYONE can do that against the BUMS you guys have played so far. You guys have played nobody except maybe the Bullets but even that is a easy win. Try and hold the Warpath to negative rushing yards. Do you wanna make a bet right now you wont hold us to negative yards????

Originally posted by Asheme
Originally posted by The Strategy Expert

Either, but I'll save you the time, the answer is he cannot. Sack yards count against passing yardage for team totals not rushing yards. And yes I realize that GLB's stat reporting system counts sack yards against running totals but that is not a logical way to report the data, and it is also inconsistent with the NFL which deducts sack yards from team passing yards, however QB personal stats remain the same with respect to his total passing yardage he has earned.

In NCAA, they report the numbers off of rushing totals, but you can't validate a stat based upon the NCAA doing something that doesn't make any sense.

Well, yeah, true, but no one is arguing the validity of the stat. As the game tabulates it, we allowed -84 rushing yards last season, and -124 this season is all he said, and didn't attach a valuating statement to it.

If you wanted to, and took out the negative sack yardage, we've allowed 41 yards on the ground this season, 57.5 coming in one game that has, thus far, been an aberration. We've had as many rushers (HBs, backup HBs, FBs, etc.) have a positive rushing total against us as have had negative totals, and only one was over 14 positive yards. Zero TDs, only one in the past two seasons (damn you, MJD).

The -124 is just for fun, sure, but we don't need it to demonstrate we're a dominant run D. It's been that way for two seasons. Just ask Tim or Chad about how their HBs have done against us.

Chad is gay and Tammy is gayer. They couldnt build a HB if their life depended on it. How bout you guys shut the Warpath down then you guys can talk. I betting it is easier said than done vrs a team that is actually GOOD!

How come I talk then everyone turns YELLOW LOL Just messing with ya Asheme but Im serious to Jed LOL

Originally posted by HoggLife
I betting it is easier said than done vrs a team that is actually GOOD!

Well, if you guys are one of the best rushing teams in USA Pro East, then this is what I would expect your run game to get (i.e. not much):

http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=36461
http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=10553
http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=10548

Originally posted by Asheme


Well, yeah, true, but no one is arguing the validity of the stat.

??

Well Jed was.

He said you guys gave up -124 rushing yards, which is flat out not true. One can't boast about non-existent stats and get away with it! lol

You guys do have a good rushing defense indeed, however not as good as what Jed was representing.

Originally posted by The Strategy Expert

??

Well Jed was.

He said you guys gave up -124 rushing yards, which just is flat out not true. One can't boast about non-existent stats and get away with it! lol


That is the stat. Rushing yards allowed, we're at -124 as the game tabulates it. So, given that's how the stat is currently recorded, then it is, in fact, true. You may or may not agree with how the game accounts for rushing yard totals, but that's a different issue.

Originally posted by

You guys do have a good defense however, but not as good as what Jed was representing.


I think the stat is a fair indicator, given that it's the same for every team. At the end of the season, if we had a certain number in the rushing yards allowed column that is far and away better than all the other teams who played the same schedule (talking about the Eastern Conference, of course) than it is a useful metric in terms of comparison of the relative strength of a team's defense, even if not being totally accurate to the name of the statistical category.

Originally posted by Asheme

That is the stat. Rushing yards allowed, we're at -124 as the game tabulates it. So, given that's how the stat is currently recorded, then it is, in fact, true. You may or may not agree with how the game accounts for rushing yard totals, but that's a different issue. .

You couldn't be more wrong about this.

That is not the stat for "rushing yards allowed". GLB doesn't own the English words "rushing" and "yards" and "allowed" amongst other words in that sentence. They are not allowed to change the meaning and definitions of those words, the stat exists in theory and is real and can be computed, GLB just doesn't happen to compute it and publish it easy for you to see. They can tabulate anything they want to and in any way but they can't change the nature of statistics and how they work and how they are correctly and logically interpreted.

I'll give you a fun little analogy as well...

Let's say you are a QB and you play in a game today and you have 1 play, 1 pass attempt, complete for 10 yards. You in fact threw for 10 yards, it happened, and in the world of statistics and how people use the word "statistics" and create statistics within this world, that would constitute an average of 10 yards per pass attempt, and nothing else can change that as it has happened and that's what it is.

Now if GLB wanted to make a stat report and say we are going to add his yards plus the total of all of the 50 rushing yards that the RB gained on that drive, and in his passing yards column he now has 10 + 50, which equals 60 and here is his stat, 60 yards per pass attempt... Just because GLB has defied the meaning of English words and twisted the world's well known acceptance of the meaning of those words as well as the mathematics and logic behind how statistics are computed, it still doesn't make 60 yards per pass attempt "the stat". The stat is 10 yards per pass attempt and there's nothing GLB can do to alter that reality.