There are 88 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Alex Finishes In Last Place

Below are the winners in the most INT's by a QB. Notice how their teams finished and their records. Poor Alex was last in this category. I am sure Coach Harbaugh is just despondent over this stat. lol


1 Ryan Fitzpatrick BUF 19

1 Josh Freeman TSM 19

1 Rex Grossman WAS 19

1 Philip Rivers SD 19

5 Eli Manning NYG 16

5 Cam Newton CAR 16

7 Carson Palmer OAK 15

7 Mark Sanchez NYJ 15

9 Matt Hasselbeck TEN 16

9 Ben Roethlisberger PIT 14

9 Matthew Stafford DET 14

12 Andy Dalton CIN 13

12 John Skelton ARI 13

12 Michael Vick PHI 13

15 Joe Flacco BAL 12

15 Tarvaris Jackson SEA 12

15 Christian Ponder MIN 12

32. ALEX SMITH SF 5
  • Shemp
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 26,841
There is a business corollary here, it's called "the cost of quality". I worked with Fortune 50 company that decide to increase their defects per million because the cost of quality was too high to achieve that level, and they could get more overall return with a defect rate that was still very good, but not as rigorous as before. If Alex could get twice as many touchdowns with twice as many INT's, that would be a great tradeoff that I would likely take. The cost of getting only 5 INT's is a pedestrian offense that requires a devastating ST and D to stay in games.
Originally posted by Shaj:
There is a business corollary here, it's called "the cost of quality". I worked with Fortune 50 company that decide to increase their defects per million because the cost of quality was too high to achieve that level, and they could get more overall return with a defect rate that was still very good, but not as rigorous as before. If Alex could get twice as many touchdowns with twice as many INT's, that would be a great tradeoff that I would likely take. The cost of getting only 5 INT's is a pedestrian offense that requires a devastating ST and D to stay in games.

Originally posted by Shaj:
There is a business corollary here, it's called "the cost of quality". I worked with Fortune 50 company that decide to increase their defects per million because the cost of quality was too high to achieve that level, and they could get more overall return with a defect rate that was still very good, but not as rigorous as before. If Alex could get twice as many touchdowns with twice as many INT's, that would be a great tradeoff that I would likely take. The cost of getting only 5 INT's is a pedestrian offense that requires a devastating ST and D to stay in games.

In your scenario the ratio changed for the defective rate. In your Alex Smith example his TD to INT ratio would stay the same if he doubled his TDs and his INTs. Correct me if I'm wrong.
  • Shemp
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 26,841
Originally posted by SVcabron1980:
Originally posted by Shaj:
There is a business corollary here, it's called "the cost of quality". I worked with Fortune 50 company that decide to increase their defects per million because the cost of quality was too high to achieve that level, and they could get more overall return with a defect rate that was still very good, but not as rigorous as before. If Alex could get twice as many touchdowns with twice as many INT's, that would be a great tradeoff that I would likely take. The cost of getting only 5 INT's is a pedestrian offense that requires a devastating ST and D to stay in games.

In your scenario the ratio changed for the defective rate. In your Alex Smith example his TD to INT ratio would stay the same if he doubled his TDs and his INTs. Correct me if I'm wrong.

yes, that's correct. I was trying to be fair about it, rather than extrapolating that he could increase TD's by more than 2x. It's a contrarian type logic, because low INTs are a generally considered a good thing, but one also has to look at the tradeoffs.
  • boast
  • All City
  • Posts: 89,372
Originally posted by Shaj:
There is a business corollary here, it's called "the cost of quality". I worked with Fortune 50 company that decide to increase their defects per million because the cost of quality was too high to achieve that level, and they could get more overall return with a defect rate that was still very good, but not as rigorous as before. If Alex could get twice as many touchdowns with twice as many INT's, that would be a great tradeoff that I would likely take. The cost of getting only 5 INT's is a pedestrian offense that requires a devastating ST and D to stay in games.

oh no a "i'm a businessman" post

bottom lines count most in the NFL.

and the bottom line is that the 49ers are 12-3, so......
Ignore reality at your own risk/reward. His TD to INT ratio was the same as Brady and Brees. Aaron Rodgers is a freak and there is only one of him. To compare him with others is not a reality check. When you consider the risks he would be taking is to ignore your argument. With no receivers capable of separation, leading the NFL in dropped passes, and no one who could run a fade route properly, and an OL which was really shaky at the onset of the season, what was he supposed to do? This is why Harbaugh might have been suggesting that Alex qualified for the Pro Bowl, he was managing the game the way the coach wanted. He was aware of the receivers and OL shortcomings. When Josh Morgan went down, he was not left with full deck to play with. Throw in a new offense and week to week OTJT, he did fine. And yes you are right, it is a team game, and the we got the points when needed.
Originally posted by Shaj:
There is a business corollary here, it's called "the cost of quality". I worked with Fortune 50 company that decide to increase their defects per million because the cost of quality was too high to achieve that level, and they could get more overall return with a defect rate that was still very good, but not as rigorous as before. If Alex could get twice as many touchdowns with twice as many INT's, that would be a great tradeoff that I would likely take. The cost of getting only 5 INT's is a pedestrian offense that requires a devastating ST and D to stay in games.

What happens after a safety?
Originally posted by Shaj:
There is a business corollary here, it's called "the cost of quality". I worked with Fortune 50 company that decide to increase their defects per million because the cost of quality was too high to achieve that level, and they could get more overall return with a defect rate that was still very good, but not as rigorous as before. If Alex could get twice as many touchdowns with twice as many INT's, that would be a great tradeoff that I would likely take. The cost of getting only 5 INT's is a pedestrian offense that requires a devastating ST and D to stay in games.

It is all interconnected. Less ints contribute to better field position, etc......which helps the D and ST stats.

If Smith doubled his TDs and INTs, who is to say that our D performs worse due to more time on the field, teams going no huddle, etc.?
Boy, we sure did a number on Roethlisberger. He would've finished second if not for us.

Also, if you add Smith's seven fumbles, he's still tied for last place on the pick list. Considering the abuse he's taken in many games, his ability to hang on to the ball while being sacked is very impressive, although he's mid-pack on that list. The qbs nearest to Smith on the pick list, Vick, Flacco, and Jackson, all have more fumbles and Ponder has only one fewer. Pretty impressive.
Originally posted by boast:
Originally posted by Shaj:
There is a business corollary here, it's called "the cost of quality". I worked with Fortune 50 company that decide to increase their defects per million because the cost of quality was too high to achieve that level, and they could get more overall return with a defect rate that was still very good, but not as rigorous as before. If Alex could get twice as many touchdowns with twice as many INT's, that would be a great tradeoff that I would likely take. The cost of getting only 5 INT's is a pedestrian offense that requires a devastating ST and D to stay in games.

oh no a "i'm a businessman" post

bottom lines count more in the NFL.

and the bottom line is that the 49ers are 12-3, so......

What happens if you surround a guy that has produced a 12-3 record with people around him that are better skilled, like let's say a Calvin Johnson or Gronkowski? Being the "successful" business man that this guy claims to be, after giving a guy a shot at the job and he closes 12 out 15 deals. Would you get rid of him or would you get guys that are willing to put in the extra effort and prove that they will do whatever it takes to get the job done just like he has? Or will you continue to settle with low production at other positions and just be happy with that one guy working harder than the others?
Last year, Alex had some "sling em" type games under Sing where he was brought out in the second half to save a game


This is different

He actually can throw the ball when the team is down in the second half and make plays

Giants

Detroit

Seahawks

That's a little more than a game manager
wait. Im confused. This does not contain all qbs. What the hell is this list?
  • boast
  • All City
  • Posts: 89,372
Originally posted by gamechanger:
Originally posted by boast:
Originally posted by Shaj:
There is a business corollary here, it's called "the cost of quality". I worked with Fortune 50 company that decide to increase their defects per million because the cost of quality was too high to achieve that level, and they could get more overall return with a defect rate that was still very good, but not as rigorous as before. If Alex could get twice as many touchdowns with twice as many INT's, that would be a great tradeoff that I would likely take. The cost of getting only 5 INT's is a pedestrian offense that requires a devastating ST and D to stay in games.

oh no a "i'm a businessman" post

bottom lines count more in the NFL.

and the bottom line is that the 49ers are 12-3, so......

What happens if you surround a guy that has produced a 12-3 record with people around him that are better skilled, like let's say a Calvin Johnson or Gronkowski? Being the "successful" business man that this guy claims to be, after giving a guy a shot at the job and he closes 12 out 15 deals. Would you get rid of him or would you get guys that are willing to put in the extra effort and prove that they will do whatever it takes to get the job done just like he has? Or will you continue to settle with low production at other positions and just be happy with that one guy working harder than the others?

the CEO (Harbaugh) doesn't seem to have any problems with the effort of his top executive. Smith seems to have done everything the company has asked him to do.
Originally posted by JoseCortez:
wait. Im confused. This does not contain all qbs. What the hell is this list?

Lol, top 15 then skips to Alex bro