Thursday Sept 8th at 5:30 p.m. PST, it's the Super Bowl rematch: Panthers at Broncos.
-
There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.
The Official 2016/2017 NFL Thread
- Thread starter CocoLoco
- Start date
Thursday Sept 8th at 5:30 p.m. PST, it's the Super Bowl rematch: Panthers at Broncos.
Eldritch
is insensitive
No, it really isn't. Designing a successful team involves Millions of Dollars in Staff that most people never hear about, not to mention the impact of individual players. There is an intensive difference in subtle formula that all go to developing a football team and there is more to the conversation that a simple Win/Loss Ratio at the end of the year. If what you are implying were true, every team in Vegas would have the same line at the beginning of the season based on win Loss ration, which they don't.
There is such a thing as a team Under or Over Performing.
I don't care how much you two argue. Harbs put the exact system that team needed into place given the personnel they had. Low risk offense and high pressure defense. He mastermind the formula. And made it, his coaching staff, and the players a success.
Johndicezx9
Rolls with it...
I just don't think people believe you...
How would you measure the teams he fielded against the teams before and after? There was a drop off in productivity and defense in his final year. But the three years he had support and control the team out performed any year prior up to 2001. And I'm not talking marginally. I'm talking an aberrantly significant difference. Including the prior three seasons (2008-2010) when the defense was supposed to have been starting to gel.
There is no way to explain that change other than to attribute it to his leadership and guidance. None. He's the only major difference. Also, the argument made regarding his last season lacking in team performance being attributed to dissent amongst the players is supported by the exodus of players after he got fired. Why would players quit in the team if they were at minimum satisfied with the direction the FO was taking them?
Take a look at the performance indicators for the teams Harbs fielded compared with the teams in the immediately prior years and, for reference, back to when the team was winning before. The change is unmistakeable. And there is no way it could be concluded that it was simply a great team peaking.
I got most of my data from pro football reference. Good site for mostly data with a smidge of analytics.
I get it if you just don't like the guy. There is no way to argue that he wasn't the ingredient that turned a mediocre offense and solid defense into a slightly above average offense and stellar defense.
There is no way to explain that change other than to attribute it to his leadership and guidance. None. He's the only major difference. Also, the argument made regarding his last season lacking in team performance being attributed to dissent amongst the players is supported by the exodus of players after he got fired. Why would players quit in the team if they were at minimum satisfied with the direction the FO was taking them?
Take a look at the performance indicators for the teams Harbs fielded compared with the teams in the immediately prior years and, for reference, back to when the team was winning before. The change is unmistakeable. And there is no way it could be concluded that it was simply a great team peaking.
I got most of my data from pro football reference. Good site for mostly data with a smidge of analytics.
I get it if you just don't like the guy. There is no way to argue that he wasn't the ingredient that turned a mediocre offense and solid defense into a slightly above average offense and stellar defense.
Bowling4Bikes
Steee-riiike!
IMO it was when Harbs started putting more faith into the arm of Kaep that the problems began. He knew he had to make the offense more dynamic than he originally intended.
They got to the AFC championship game, which they were in position to win. The bowman injury, coupled with the sudden realization that Kaep maybe wasn't the next coming of Joe, and of course along with front-office shenanigans, all combined to form that 8-8 regression.
They got to the AFC championship game, which they were in position to win. The bowman injury, coupled with the sudden realization that Kaep maybe wasn't the next coming of Joe, and of course along with front-office shenanigans, all combined to form that 8-8 regression.
agreed. he did 10x as much with almost no roster turnover from Singletary year
it may have still been a shitty O but it became effective enough to win.
pretty much this. this is a large part of why the team fell apart. not just the defensive player exodous.
if Kaep had shown even a modicum of ability to change and adapt to the new defenses thrown at him we'd be having a different conversation right now, and a superbowl ring to boot
Right. It was because they players were sad because Harbaugh wasn't given a gigantic extension. That's why they didn't play very good 
Had nothing at all to do with the fact that Justin Smith was playing his last few seasons well into his 30s injured all the time, Aldon Smith being an idiot who got himself suspended multiple times, Patrick Willis' foot injury, Crabtree's torn achilles, etc...
Had nothing at all to do with the fact that Justin Smith was playing his last few seasons well into his 30s injured all the time, Aldon Smith being an idiot who got himself suspended multiple times, Patrick Willis' foot injury, Crabtree's torn achilles, etc...
or if they'd given the ball to Gore once or twice against the Ravens.
I think Kaep's rise was pushed more by the FO than Harbs and his resistance and reticence toward it was the final straw. I think he wanted to keep the low risk, low scoring offense and the FO, supported by the fans (including myself), pushed to increase the dynamism of the offense.
The first bit of data I looked at was the point differential. Yes, some of it comes from the defense scoring. However, drilling down into offensive efficiency shows that the offense became very efficient if not high scoring. Harbs made sure to protect leads and have the team in position to win games by limiting offensive mistakes.
P.S. Harbs was getting the team to produce about 50-100 more points a year for the three years he had control and support. That's an average of 3.1-6.3 points per game. That can be the difference between winning and losing with a system where the offense isn't asked to overwhelm the opponent with points.
The first bit of data I looked at was the point differential. Yes, some of it comes from the defense scoring. However, drilling down into offensive efficiency shows that the offense became very efficient if not high scoring. Harbs made sure to protect leads and have the team in position to win games by limiting offensive mistakes.
P.S. Harbs was getting the team to produce about 50-100 more points a year for the three years he had control and support. That's an average of 3.1-6.3 points per game. That can be the difference between winning and losing with a system where the offense isn't asked to overwhelm the opponent with points.
Attachments
Last edited:
Maybe so. Do you think that Harbs would switch to something that didn't work though? I don't. Once he got the full measure of Kaep's limitations I have no doubt that he was prepared to continue to run the same game plan he had been running for the first three years.
Also, there were flashes of solid play particularly in the first half of the season. Do you remember the comeback against the Iggles ? The team didn't really hit the skids until the latter half of the season.
Last edited:
Chargers just gave the middle finger to their unsigned rookie Bosa who has refused to sign a contract. Now they'll offer him less. 
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ers-issue-statement-on-joey-bosa-negotiations
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ers-issue-statement-on-joey-bosa-negotiations
But the whole idea is that Harbaugh is the QB God and turned Alex Smith into a good player after he was so horrible etc etc, right?
That would mean that Harbaugh was either wrong about Kaep or not good enough to coach him up?
Chargers just gave the middle finger to their unsigned rookie Bosa who has refused to sign a contract. Now they'll offer him less.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ers-issue-statement-on-joey-bosa-negotiations
Yeah, no. The Chargers are fucking idiots.
Bosa is asking for the same contract that every other high pick has gotten since the new contract rules started in 2012, and the Chargers are trying to get out of it.
The Chargers are willing to let the #3 pick go over a few million dollars. Talk about an inept fucking franchise.
Kaep has a higher QB rating than Hall of Fame QB Dan Marino....Jim Harbaugh coached Kaep up nicely. Plz keep talking buddy, we need the amusement while waiting for the regular season to hurry up and get here.
Kaep's sore arm is rested, he's zinging the football again in practice. A healthy Kaep in a GO GO GO Chip Kelly offense is something I want to see.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yh2vpBchfw
[youtube]7yh2vpBchfw[/youtube]
But from the Chargers point of view, they offered him a very fair contract. They even broke it down into layman's terms to prove how attractive their offer was:
Attachments
From my perspective Harbs values practicality above all else. To a fault even. It's one of the reasons he only deigns to give interviews to sports reporters. I'm still not certain Kaep was all Harbs. I think that there was battle over it. Harbs lost. And being the practical soldier he is he embraced it and ran with it. Until it became apparent that Kaep's "upside" wasn't nearly as high as was initially billed. The next war, which he lost again, was a push for a more dynamic offense. But there is a difference here. And it's why Harbs left. While as head coach he wasn't responsible for player personnel choices - he didn't have final say - as head coach he did expect to have final say regarding game plans and designing/shaping the "style" of play the team put out on the field. Losing that war was one he wasn't willing to accept. And I don't blame him. Supporting Greg Roman dovetails into it as well. Harbs may not have the authority over player personnel but he sure as hell expected to have it over his staff.
*disclaimer - I do not have any proof other than my own experience and performing a mental autopsy of the whole thing, the people involved, the way things unfolded, and the bits of info revealed through the press.