There are 140 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Which is More Important to You?

Which is More Important to You?

Originally posted by WildBill:
Originally posted by oldman9er:
I believe it was verified that in the games Cam Newton and the Panthers won? Cam had modest stats... and in the games they lost, he threw for gaudy stats? Why? because the D sucked and they needed him to force passes downfield for large yardage, no? So, how many games did our D suck and force our QB to throw for large yardage?

... yeah, maybe vs the Eagles... and he sorta did. Had around 200 yds passing in just that 2nd half, no?


jus' sayin'....

Stats not withstanding, wouldn't it be better if the O could score also as well as having a good D. To score more points, you need to cross the enemies territory and get into the endzone. Not being to able to move the ball and relying on filed goals makes it harder for a team and puts you on thin ice. You move the ball a little but can't get enough to score a TD, The other sideonly needs to score 1 TD and they win the game. Give me 2 TDs over four FGs. As it means you crossed the field ate up the clock and gives your D more to work with.

Well, there is desperation in coming back from large deficits, and then there is playing to your strengths in close games.

In a year 1 WCO with no offseason and no quality targets aside from VD and Crabtree (both who didn't know much of the system)... our strengths were clear. Lean on the D, STs, and run game.

Don't know why this is so hard for some to grasp. It has been said repeatedly. Do my words not ring true for you?
Totally relieved I didn't see any "stats" as more important.
Stats or wins, it won't matter this year because Alex will be bending his front leg on all his throws!

The best of both worlds!


Matter of fact this thread is pointless!
Originally posted by JustaFan45:
Stats or wins, it won't matter this year because Alex will be bending his front leg on all his throws!

The best of both worlds!


Matter of fact this thread is pointless!

JustaFan was up bruh, knew youd pop up in a thread i made at some point. Pointless huh. Pretty cool that Smith brought it up in an interview. All for being your regular self, gotta agree tho it was pretty cool right. Could of stopped at best of both worlds, but.... ,nah. Thanks for posting anyway. Go niners!
Originally posted by fly15:
Originally posted by jreff22:
Wins are more important but your top WR needs to catch more then 5 balls in two playoff games.

Wins are more important but the starting qb needs to have more than 495 yds the entire postseason.


Unless the team wins the super bowl of course.
Originally posted by Jersey9er:
JustaFan was up bruh, knew youd pop up in a thread i made at some point. Pointless huh. Pretty cool that Smith brought it up in an interview. All for being your regular self, gotta agree tho it was pretty cool right. Could of stopped at best of both worlds, but.... ,nah. Thanks for posting anyway. Go niners!
You're welcome! Just doing my part to move this thread along.


EDIT: You knew I would pop up in one of your threads??
Originally posted by genus49:
I think it's pretty obvious that wins are more important. The problem is they usually go hand in hand. I've done this in some other threads but you're going to win more games when your qb throws for 300 yards and 3 TDs than you are with your qb throwing for 200 yards and 2 TDs.

People tend to counter that by saying but a qb who throws for 300 yard and 3TDs also throws for 2 INT but that doesn't have to happen. There are plenty of qbs in this game who put up big numbers and don't turn the ball over.

When you play games close at some point you can run out of luck. That's what unfortunately happened to us vs the Giants. Lost the turnover battle, played too safe on offense and lost a close game.


Stats help to compare with history, but ultimately, watching the player play is what shows the most.

The above bold statement is exactly the problem with playing close games and not giving your defense any breathing room. You can't consistently win that way every year. Great defensive teams might win one Super Bowl, and then they're done for a decade and more.

MOST Super Bowl teams put up big numbers on offense. ZERO have ever won with the 29th ranked passing game. Fans want to upgrade their team in any way possible. The debate about stats is really just a debate about players and where a team can upgrade. If the goal is to compete for a Super Bowl every year, stats will demonstrate certain things when they are lined up with what history has dictated.
History shows the naked truth, and stats allow you to compare with history in an imperfect but useful way. Debating stats is a debate about how to consistently compete for Super Bowl wins.
[ Edited by BrianGO on May 23, 2012 at 11:29 PM ]
This thread is like the chicken or the egg question
Stats are nice, but winning is awesome....... Nothing beats the "W".
Originally posted by susweel:
Stats are more important.













for fantasy football nerds.

Obviously wins are important but to me, it is more about the degree of good wins. How much did we destroy the other team in every aspect of football.
Wins. And I dont care how we win, just win. We can dissect the game after . . . just win.
You won't win many conference championship games if your WR's combine for 1 catch and 3 yards.
Originally posted by genus49:
I think it's pretty obvious that wins are more important. The problem is they usually go hand in hand. I've done this in some other threads but you're going to win more games when your qb throws for 300 yards and 3 TDs than you are with your qb throwing for 200 yards and 2 TDs.

People tend to counter that by saying but a qb who throws for 300 yard and 3TDs also throws for 2 INT but that doesn't have to happen. There are plenty of qbs in this game who put up big numbers and don't turn the ball over.

When you play games close at some point you can run out of luck. That's what unfortunately happened to us vs the Giants. Lost the turnover battle, played too safe on offense and lost a close game.


I don't disagree that more yards are better than fewer, all other stats remaining the same, but that really isn't the issue here. Due to a short TC, new coaches, and a totally new system the team decided to play field position and limit mistakes. It was a very good plan that was further needed when WRs went down.

If the yards were pretty much the same but half the FGs were turned into TDs the scores would have been much more impressive and YPG would be even more meaningless. Smith's stats were very similar in Utah but they scored TDs...and won games. Is a high YPG more exciting? Yes, but I prefer wins however they come.
The only stat that means anything is the score.