I didn't know Chris Ivory was activated to play last night!

AlaskaSaints · 10-09-2012, 01:37 PM

UNLEASH the BEAST

Alaska

Rell&Gold · 10-09-2012, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by |Mitch|

Doubt It! Everyone knows what happens to the Falcons in the playoffs...

LOL...Choke!

The Dude · 10-09-2012, 02:48 PM

If RG3 had not gotten knocked out Atlanta would have lost.

Shoe. · 10-09-2012, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by Radical

As much as we play nickel, we wouldn't use him much anyways. He'll want to come back next year anyways. I'm sure he's regretting his choice to go to a "winning team."

I don't understand how any team couldn't use the league's leading tackler, nickel or not...

SaintsBro · 10-09-2012, 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by The Dude

If RG3 had not gotten knocked out Atlanta would have lost.

Not only that, he wasn't even really "knocked out" of the game, under the old rules he would have been right back in the game a series or two later. But was not allowed to return.

Radical · 10-09-2012, 06:10 PM

How do you guys figure we would have lost? The only points they scored was a FG after we knocked RGIII out, and then a long TD by Kirk do to a miscommunication by our safeties, which was also the only 3rd down they converted the whole game.

Originally Posted by Shoe.

I don't understand how any team couldn't use the league's leading tackler, nickel or not...

Ignoring the fact that tackles is a grossly overrated stat, it's because he wouldn't see that many snaps. Nicholas and Weatherspoon are better rush and coverage LBs, and in most of our games, Dent(our MLB) has seen less than 10 snaps.

Granted, he's a lot better than Dent, but it would be hard to justify a decent contract to a guy that will probably take most of the season to see more than 100 snaps.

Radical · 10-09-2012, 06:12 PM

Double Post

Utah_Saint · 10-09-2012, 08:19 PM

Originally Posted by Radical

How do you guys figure we would have lost? The only points they scored was a FG after we knocked RGIII out, and then a long TD by Kirk do to a miscommunication by our safeties, which was also the only 3rd down they converted the whole game.

Ignoring the fact that tackles is a grossly overrated stat, it's because he wouldn't see that many snaps. Nicholas and Weatherspoon are better rush and coverage LBs, and in most of our games, Dent(our MLB) has seen less than 10 snaps.

Granted, he's a lot better than Dent, but it would be hard to justify a decent contract to a guy that will probably take most of the season to see more than 100 snaps.

Tackles are grossly over rated?!? I'm kind of a stat nerd but I've never heard anyone ever say that before. Is that new? Lots of tackles arent a good thing anymore?

When you say Weatherspoon is better at coverage what exactly do you mean? Are you using a metric to compare?
Since Weatherspoon has been in the league he's had 11 passes defended and 1 interception.
Over that time, Lofton has had 12 passes defended and 3 interceptions.

In that same time frame, Lofton has had 319 tackles. Weatherspoon has had only 194. That's less than two thirds of Loftons production. Not to mention the fact that Weatherspoon has one of the lowest tackling efficiency rates of all linebackers in the NFL.

From all that you conclude that the Falcons wouldn't have used Lofton more than 100 snaps in a season? Even Dent, who is having a very poor year statistically is trending to have more snaps than that. That sounds pretty far fetched don't ya think?

CharityMike · 10-09-2012, 08:22 PM

Originally Posted by Utah_Saint

Tackles are grossly over rated?!? I'm kind of a stat nerd but I've never heard anyone ever say that before. Is that new? Lots of tackles arent a good thing anymore?

When you say Weatherspoon is better at coverage what exactly do you mean? Are you using a metric to compare?
Since Weatherspoon has been in the league he's had 11 passes defended and 1 interception.
Over that time, Lofton has had 12 passes defended and 3 interceptions.

In that same time frame, Lofton has had 319 tackles. Weatherspoon has had only 194. That's less than two thirds of Loftons production. Not to mention the fact that Weatherspoon has one of the lowest tackling efficiency rates of all linebackers in the NFL.

From all that you conclude that the Falcons wouldn't have used Lofton more than 100 snaps in a season? Even Dent, who is having a very poor year statistically is trending to have more snaps than that. That sounds pretty far fetched don't ya think?

GET EM!!

Radical · 10-09-2012, 08:54 PM

Originally Posted by Utah_Saint

Tackles are grossly over rated?!? I'm kind of a stat nerd but I've never heard anyone ever say that before. Is that new? Lots of tackles arent a good thing anymore?

When you say Weatherspoon is better at coverage what exactly do you mean? Are you using a metric to compare?
Since Weatherspoon has been in the league he's had 11 passes defended and 1 interception.
Over that time, Lofton has had 12 passes defended and 3 interceptions.

In that same time frame, Lofton has had 319 tackles. Weatherspoon has had only 194. That's less than two thirds of Loftons production. Not to mention the fact that Weatherspoon has one of the lowest tackling efficiency rates of all linebackers in the NFL.

From all that you conclude that the Falcons wouldn't have used Lofton more than 100 snaps in a season? Even Dent, who is having a very poor year statistically is trending to have more snaps than that. That sounds pretty far fetched don't ya think?

Yes, number of tackles are an overrated stat, and it isn't new. The tackle stat doesn't provide context, at all. Is the player getting tackles after they just gave what should have been a defensed pass, because he took a poor pursuit angle and ended up tackling a ball carrier several yards later than he should have, or a myriad of other examples. It isn't necessarily a bad stat to have a high number of tackles, but it is doesn't really show how good or bad a player is.

My metric is PFF, which is endorsed by players, agents, and personnel around the league. Concerning Lofton though, one thing about him is that historically he's been mediocre in pass coverage, and really doesn't have an instinct for it. With Atlanta, he had to operate with "spot" coverage instead of a true zone. This is where you drop back to a specific spot on the field and hang there rather than playing a true zone where you have to consider depth and tracking players across an area. Weatherspoon last year was fantastic in all phases of the game as we moved through the year, especially in coverage. I'd like to have a source from your tackling efficiency on him.

I never said we wouldn't use him more than 100 snaps either, just that for his contract size, it wouldn't be worth it if he ends up needing most of the season to get past 100 snaps.

10-09-2012, 01:37 PM	#11
AlaskaSaints 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Anchorage, AK Posts: 2,484 Blog Entries: 2	Re: I didn't know Chris Ivory was activated to play last night! UNLEASH the BEAST Alaska

10-09-2012, 01:57 PM	#12
Rell&Gold 1000 Posts + Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Washington, D.C Posts: 2,887	Re: I didn't know Chris Ivory was activated to play last night! Originally Posted by \|Mitch\| Doubt It! Everyone knows what happens to the Falcons in the playoffs... LOL...Choke!

10-09-2012, 02:48 PM	#13
The Dude 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 9,050	Re: I didn't know Chris Ivory was activated to play last night! If RG3 had not gotten knocked out Atlanta would have lost. SaintsBro likes this.
The Dude 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 9,050

10-09-2012, 04:31 PM	#14
Shoe. 500th Post Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Hub City Posts: 576	Re: I didn't know Chris Ivory was activated to play last night! Originally Posted by Radical As much as we play nickel, we wouldn't use him much anyways. He'll want to come back next year anyways. I'm sure he's regretting his choice to go to a "winning team." I don't understand how any team couldn't use the league's leading tackler, nickel or not...

10-09-2012, 05:06 PM	#15
SaintsBro Site Donor Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: in line with my ridiculous CLEAR PLASTIC BAG Posts: 3,650 Blog Entries: 3	Re: I didn't know Chris Ivory was activated to play last night! Originally Posted by The Dude If RG3 had not gotten knocked out Atlanta would have lost. Not only that, he wasn't even really "knocked out" of the game, under the old rules he would have been right back in the game a series or two later. But was not allowed to return.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

10-09-2012, 06:10 PM	#16
Radical Falcons Fan Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 148	Re: I didn't know Chris Ivory was activated to play last night! How do you guys figure we would have lost? The only points they scored was a FG after we knocked RGIII out, and then a long TD by Kirk do to a miscommunication by our safeties, which was also the only 3rd down they converted the whole game. Originally Posted by Shoe. I don't understand how any team couldn't use the league's leading tackler, nickel or not... Ignoring the fact that tackles is a grossly overrated stat, it's because he wouldn't see that many snaps. Nicholas and Weatherspoon are better rush and coverage LBs, and in most of our games, Dent(our MLB) has seen less than 10 snaps. Granted, he's a lot better than Dent, but it would be hard to justify a decent contract to a guy that will probably take most of the season to see more than 100 snaps.
Radical Falcons Fan Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 148	For the fans, by the fans. - AtlantaFalconsTalk

10-09-2012, 06:12 PM	#17
Radical Falcons Fan Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 148	Re: I didn't know Chris Ivory was activated to play last night! Double Post
Radical Falcons Fan Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 148	Last edited by Radical; 10-09-2012 at 06:22 PM.. Reason: Double Post

10-09-2012, 08:19 PM	#18
Utah_Saint Site Donor 2019 Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Salt Lake City, Utah Posts: 3,521	Re: I didn't know Chris Ivory was activated to play last night! Originally Posted by Radical How do you guys figure we would have lost? The only points they scored was a FG after we knocked RGIII out, and then a long TD by Kirk do to a miscommunication by our safeties, which was also the only 3rd down they converted the whole game. Ignoring the fact that tackles is a grossly overrated stat, it's because he wouldn't see that many snaps. Nicholas and Weatherspoon are better rush and coverage LBs, and in most of our games, Dent(our MLB) has seen less than 10 snaps. Granted, he's a lot better than Dent, but it would be hard to justify a decent contract to a guy that will probably take most of the season to see more than 100 snaps. Tackles are grossly over rated?!? I'm kind of a stat nerd but I've never heard anyone ever say that before. Is that new? Lots of tackles arent a good thing anymore? When you say Weatherspoon is better at coverage what exactly do you mean? Are you using a metric to compare? Since Weatherspoon has been in the league he's had 11 passes defended and 1 interception. Over that time, Lofton has had 12 passes defended and 3 interceptions. In that same time frame, Lofton has had 319 tackles. Weatherspoon has had only 194. That's less than two thirds of Loftons production. Not to mention the fact that Weatherspoon has one of the lowest tackling efficiency rates of all linebackers in the NFL. From all that you conclude that the Falcons wouldn't have used Lofton more than 100 snaps in a season? Even Dent, who is having a very poor year statistically is trending to have more snaps than that. That sounds pretty far fetched don't ya think?

10-09-2012, 08:22 PM	#19
CharityMike Site Donor 2018 Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Mid City, New Orleans Posts: 3,556	Re: I didn't know Chris Ivory was activated to play last night! Originally Posted by Utah_Saint Tackles are grossly over rated?!? I'm kind of a stat nerd but I've never heard anyone ever say that before. Is that new? Lots of tackles arent a good thing anymore? When you say Weatherspoon is better at coverage what exactly do you mean? Are you using a metric to compare? Since Weatherspoon has been in the league he's had 11 passes defended and 1 interception. Over that time, Lofton has had 12 passes defended and 3 interceptions. In that same time frame, Lofton has had 319 tackles. Weatherspoon has had only 194. That's less than two thirds of Loftons production. Not to mention the fact that Weatherspoon has one of the lowest tackling efficiency rates of all linebackers in the NFL. From all that you conclude that the Falcons wouldn't have used Lofton more than 100 snaps in a season? Even Dent, who is having a very poor year statistically is trending to have more snaps than that. That sounds pretty far fetched don't ya think? GET EM!!

10-09-2012, 08:54 PM	#20
Radical Falcons Fan Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 148	Re: I didn't know Chris Ivory was activated to play last night! Originally Posted by Utah_Saint Tackles are grossly over rated?!? I'm kind of a stat nerd but I've never heard anyone ever say that before. Is that new? Lots of tackles arent a good thing anymore? When you say Weatherspoon is better at coverage what exactly do you mean? Are you using a metric to compare? Since Weatherspoon has been in the league he's had 11 passes defended and 1 interception. Over that time, Lofton has had 12 passes defended and 3 interceptions. In that same time frame, Lofton has had 319 tackles. Weatherspoon has had only 194. That's less than two thirds of Loftons production. Not to mention the fact that Weatherspoon has one of the lowest tackling efficiency rates of all linebackers in the NFL. From all that you conclude that the Falcons wouldn't have used Lofton more than 100 snaps in a season? Even Dent, who is having a very poor year statistically is trending to have more snaps than that. That sounds pretty far fetched don't ya think? Yes, number of tackles are an overrated stat, and it isn't new. The tackle stat doesn't provide context, at all. Is the player getting tackles after they just gave what should have been a defensed pass, because he took a poor pursuit angle and ended up tackling a ball carrier several yards later than he should have, or a myriad of other examples. It isn't necessarily a bad stat to have a high number of tackles, but it is doesn't really show how good or bad a player is. My metric is PFF, which is endorsed by players, agents, and personnel around the league. Concerning Lofton though, one thing about him is that historically he's been mediocre in pass coverage, and really doesn't have an instinct for it. With Atlanta, he had to operate with "spot" coverage instead of a true zone. This is where you drop back to a specific spot on the field and hang there rather than playing a true zone where you have to consider depth and tracking players across an area. Weatherspoon last year was fantastic in all phases of the game as we moved through the year, especially in coverage. I'd like to have a source from your tackling efficiency on him. I never said we wouldn't use him more than 100 snaps either, just that for his contract size, it wouldn't be worth it if he ends up needing most of the season to get past 100 snaps.
Radical Falcons Fan Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 148	For the fans, by the fans. - AtlantaFalconsTalk

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/51722-i-didnt-know-chris-ivory-activated-play-last-night.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
I didn't know Chris Ivory was activated to play last night!	This thread	Refback	10-08-2012 08:54 PM	2