A misperception about the Titans' approach

Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by NewsGrabber, Mar 4, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Riverman

    Riverman That may be....

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Messages:
    8,791
    Now come on fellas- is it luck that some owner's teams have MULTIPLE Super wins and victories and others have none over the same period of time?

    Statistical theory just doesn't support the "luck" argument. The owner's haven't changed much during that period and I would suggest that the organizational philosophy hasn't either.

    And Gunny- I have been criticizing this franchise for not winning a Super Bowl. Hell- even for making to the big game just once despite many seasons that the team was well staffed with A- talent. I have contended that it isn't luck, but rather the presence of sufficient A+ players to get it over the top for the playoff and Super Bowl victories. Yes- some teams hit on their draft picks- but it wasn't luck. They deserve credit for their scouting. We just haven't been that good at scouting and/or developing WR's.

    I'm really interested to see how T.O. does in Buffalo. Their franchise has a similar approach as ours and they have MANY more SB appearances but no more wins. They missed the playoffs this year, so I think the FO broke down and threw the fans a bone. We'll see if a true #1 WR FA like TO can make a 6.5 million dollar difference to win a few more games.
    #41
    • High Five High Five x 1
  2. PhiSlammaJamma

    PhiSlammaJamma Critical Possession

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2003
    Messages:
    6,521
    It seems to me mathematically that luck exists, but it is buried by all other acts on and off the field. Take a fumble for example. The way the ball bounces is for the most part luck, but it took a skill player to cause it, and unskilled player to allow it to happen, and a series of skilled players to be in position to pick it up. It is almost an equation filled with nothing but personnel, training, and skill. And the luck portion of that event is outweighed by all other factors on such a scale, that you have to wonder if luck was involved at all.

    I really have no idea what I'm talking about in this regard. But I may have to read up on luck now to see what I really think.
    #42
    • High Five High Five x 1
  3. Gunny

    Gunny Lord and Master Tip Jar Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Messages:
    46,988
    Of course it is luck. If there was some secret formula or method that these owners have to winning a championship don't you think there'd be more wins for the Jones' or the Rooneys or whoever?

    Hell most of Pittsburghs Rings come with a free injection of steroids. Dallas and the 49ers had some of the greatest players ever on their team.
    #43
  4. GoTitans3801

    GoTitans3801 Forward Progress!

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Messages:
    7,640
    I don't think ANYONE would argue that luck is what wins you a Superbowl. However, I find it hard to believe that luck doesn't have ANY role in it. There are several teams each year who are good enough to win the Superbowl. One of them will, the others won't. Do you really think that they Superbowl winner is always the best team from that season? I understand that by definition, it is, but there have clearly been some years where another team could have won the superbowl if just a couple of things had happened differently. If not for the Tuck Rule, the Pats may not have won that Superbowl. If not for the Helmet Catch, the Giants may have lost to the Pats. I'm not saying that it diminishes the accomplishment, but that we have to recognize that luck is there. You prepare all year for the playoffs, to make the most out of each game. You have to do the best that you can. However, sometimes things happen that you can't recover from. Yes, it's the Titans responsibility in that playoff game to overcome the obstacles (turnovers, penalties, injuries) that present themselves. However, that doesn't mean that luck isn't a factor.

    Luck is a poor excuse, and we shouldn't use it. But it's there, and it's hard to really blame the team for anything in particular in the Ravens game for why we lost. We were producing enough offense, but we didn't get the points on the board. We held the Ravens to 13 points and very little offensive movement, but that was enough to beat us. Turnovers are game changers, and some of them can be prevented. Some can't.
    #44
  5. Riverman

    Riverman That may be....

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Messages:
    8,791

    Here is the problem I have with the luck ideology.

    I believe the final score of a game is the sum of all events. Yes- some are random like the coin toss or which way the ball bounces after a fumble or on a kick etc, but there are so many elements to preparation that allow a team to limit the effects that "luck" (or random events as I prefer to call it) will have ON THE SCORE, which is the ultimate reflection of the intent of the game. Yes, the Ravens capitalized on turnovers and thus won the game. But in my view, the effect that those random events has on which team has the higher final score can be drastically minimized with better preparation for the contest.

    Some folks seem to get stuck on the "How" when debating this point rather than understanding the point I am really trying to make which is that our organization can do things better to stop losing the in playoffs like we do. (To indulge the "how" folks, things like a ball handling reminder or review during a timeout or in the huddle, having an alternate game plan available and willingness to use it, utilizing more of a red zone passing attack, etc)

    In the case of the Ravens game, clearly we failed to get the ball in the end zone- for a myriad of reasons, not just the turnovers. But the ball just didn't spontaneously pop-out of our players hands- events happened with poor play on our part and good play on theirs that created that situation.

    Had we been better prepared, those turnovers should not have kept what I view as a Super Bowl caliber team from only being able to finish the game with 10 points.

    "Poor luck" is a weak azz excuse and a recipe for continued playoff exits.

    In regards to the thread topic, I believe this organzation does not value "play-makers" as much as it should. Yes- some teams "over-value" them and pay too much for too little in return. But in games that count- like playoffs or Super Bowls, quality playmakers help to make the plays that get points against the quality of opponent you see in those games. We certainly needed more than a single offensive playmaker like Chris Johnson in that game as was evidenced when he went out with injury.
    #45
  6. GoTitans3801

    GoTitans3801 Forward Progress!

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Messages:
    7,640
    I'll agree that a team should be able to overcome random events, in general. However, I honestly believe that in that game, there were several random events that, given their timing and location, were too much to overcome. Just like the Jags game a few years ago when the Jags by all rights should have won, but we got 3 defensive returns for TDs. They couldn't overcome that. It doesn't mean that we're blameless, it doesn't mean that we can't improve. It does mean that maybe the system isn't as faulty as you think.

    As far as playmakers, this team prefers to get its stars in the draft. Considering that both of our last two high first round picks, guys that should be our faces of the team, aren't starting for us. This team was as good as it was last season, despite Pacman and Vince Young not making any contribution. Other than the two of them, we haven't had a top ten draft pick in a LONG time. We've made great use of late round picks, but the fact that those two weren't producing anything for us last season really hurts.

    Free agency isn't the only place to get good playmakers. We've made some great draft picks to get playmakers, but when a couple of our biggest fall short, it has an impact.
    #46
  7. Riverman

    Riverman That may be....

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Messages:
    8,791
    I understand and respect your points. I just don't agree with the lack of accountability that some posters are ascribing as "bad luck" in that Ravens game. It wasn't just that we couldn't overcome those turnovers as much as they should never have happened. Yes, I know the our team isn't perfect and never will be, but I will always believe that your performance directly reflects your preparation. In my personal and professional world, excuses are not allowed. When undesirable results occur, it is accountability and responsibility that significantly reduce the likelihood of them recurring.

    In the case of this organization, there has been FAR too many playoff exits without a Lombardi trophy.
    #47
  8. Alex1939

    Alex1939 Old Man Tip Jar Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    16,401
    I hope IF the Titans ever win the Superbowl that all the posters here touting luck as a main reason for a teams success will say...

    How lucky the Titans were to win a Superbowl!
    #48
    • High Five High Five x 1
  9. GoTitans3801

    GoTitans3801 Forward Progress!

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Messages:
    7,640
    If we win a superbowl, we'd better be willing to admit that luck has some part in it. It's not as much a part as the hard work and effort, but it effects every superbowl.
    #49
  10. Riverman

    Riverman That may be....

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Messages:
    8,791
    When we win a Super Bowl, only thing I'm saying is ....well, I won't be able to say anything intelligible for 3 days. The thing I'd say after that would be "well done".
    #50
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.