There are 125 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Alex Finishes In Last Place

Originally posted by boast:
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......

^^this I don't even take him seriously considering that he doesn't even know the rules regarding a safety in the NFL
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.


Terrific post, and certainly poignant. After all, NFL is a business first - His true value will be coming shortly. If we are to beat the Saints or Packers, we are going to need the pedestrian numbers to increase mightily. I BELIEVE! Let her fly Alex!
  • Shemp
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 26,710
Originally posted by NineFourNiner:
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.?

it could work against us, I agree. I love the low INT rate, but I can't help but wonder what would happen if we opened things up a bit. Chances are that a Saints or Packers type offense would have the advantage against even our defense, so the Offense needs to play much differently than it has before in order to compete.
Originally posted by Shaj:
it could work against us, I agree. I love the low INT rate, but I can't help but wonder what would happen if we opened things up a bit. Chances are that a Saints or Packers type offense would have the advantage against even our defense, so the Offense needs to play much differently than it has before in order to compete.

After the Baltimore game we did open it up a bit, especially against the Cards, and it wasn't real pretty, as I recall.
Originally posted by Rubberneck36:
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

Alex is still top 10 rating wise

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/quarterbackRating/year/2011/seasontype/2

That nig##'s been camped out there all YEAR

SO GET USED TO IT
Originally posted by JoseCortez:
wait. Im confused. This does not contain all qbs. What the hell is this list?
Jose, you might want to check out nfl.com and click on "stats" and then "player stats", then you won't look so foolish.
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.

Yup those ultra conservative decisions probably cost us at least 15-20 TDs this year. It works right now because our defense and special teams are the shizznit but one day we are gonna need those TDs. Hopefully he can come through for us.
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.

Cost of quality? 12-3? Hmmm.
  • Shemp
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 26,710
Originally posted by fastforward:
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.

Cost of quality? 12-3? Hmmm.

I'm as thrilled with 12 - 3 as you are. But if all of this only gets us on the losing end of a shoot out with the Saints or Packers, then our formula needs to be adjusted. Our D and ST are golden, so that leaves the offense. Alex has great ratings but low output. The question is, can his quality scale with increased quantity (primarily yards & TDs)? If so, then why not? It might get us a superbowl. It seems to be the only missing ingredient at this point.
Originally posted by Shaj:
Originally posted by fastforward:
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.

Cost of quality? 12-3? Hmmm.

I'm as thrilled with 12 - 3 as you are. But if all of this only gets us on the losing end of a shoot out with the Saints or Packers, then our formula needs to be adjusted. Our D and ST are golden, so that leaves the offense. Alex has great ratings but low output. The question is, can his quality scale with increased quantity (primarily yards & TDs)? If so, then why not? It might get us a superbowl. It seems to be the only missing ingredient at this point.

if we lose a shoot out to saints or green bay then u cant say our D is golden, cus we would have given up too many points, we're not faking the funk, to win, we're gonna have to hold them to around 20 points, thats just the way it is
Our defense has an obvious advantge over those offenses. We would take away their running games and force them to pass, allowing our pass rushers to tee off.
Originally posted by Shaj:
Originally posted by fastforward:
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.

Cost of quality? 12-3? Hmmm.

I'm as thrilled with 12 - 3 as you are. But if all of this only gets us on the losing end of a shoot out with the Saints or Packers, then our formula needs to be adjusted. Our D and ST are golden, so that leaves the offense. Alex has great ratings but low output. The question is, can his quality scale with increased quantity (primarily yards & TDs)? If so, then why not? It might get us a superbowl. It seems to be the only missing ingredient at this point.

wins get you to the SB not yards and TDs. notice how Cam Newton is not the SB MVP this year.
Originally posted by Shaj:
I'm as thrilled with 12 - 3 as you are. But if all of this only gets us on the losing end of a shoot out with the Saints or Packers, then our formula needs to be adjusted. Our D and ST are golden, so that leaves the offense. Alex has great ratings but low output. The question is, can his quality scale with increased quantity (primarily yards & TDs)? If so, then why not? It might get us a superbowl. It seems to be the only missing ingredient at this point.

There are several explanations for the "pedestrian" offense, and the fault wasn't Smith's alone. Let the season play out then Harbaugh et al. can make the determination on the areas that need the most attention. IMO Smith was (and has proven to be) the best choice among the QBs available at the beginning of the season to run Harbaugh's offense. One can argue that things could be improved, but the fact of the matter is it is the way it is. Even if the 49ers go one and out (a huge disappointment for me too) in the playoffs, this season has been beyond anybody's hope at the start of the season.

From the business perspective, this is like the early years of a product line that a company only expected to sell a low numbers. Therefore in risking of a huge flop in creating negative customer reaction, the managers focused on quality and produced just enough to be profitable and to create positive buzz. They surely underestimated the market demand, but given the limited resources they have to focus on the areas of strength, and their strength was not in mass production like that earlier and wildly successful Green Cheese company next door could do. This product has proven to be a hit, much better than the managers expected. Even if they don't get Product of the Year vote, they have some branding success now, and can fine-tune to ramp up production in the next few years.
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.

Pretty spot on. Too bad half the board won't get it.
Rodgers is a counterpoint to Alex, and so is Brady. Both pitched a few more picks (Brady has 11 I believe)....but an obscene number of TDs and yards in comparison. Brady has close to 5000 passing yards as well.