Mayo leads NFL in tackles - BY 33

[aluminum seats]

That's fine but not one of you has stated why a tackle is a misleading or discreditable statistic compared to any other statistic considering they can all be misleading and all have contextual application.

That's the point.

No, the point is you're wrong--I see Andy Johnson just made yet another good point about the stat above. Yes, there can be misuses of all stats. But the tackling stat in particular is one that appears to be more malleable than most. What's more, just sniffing, "embarassing really" when guys are making thoughtful posts about it is just sort of silly.

 

[strngplyr]

I still haven't read a compelling argument as to why a tackle isn't a valid measure of performance on the basis of

1. They don't state down,
2. They don't state position of the tackle,
3. They can be padded.

What I have read is people attempting to discredit the fact that Mayo is performing to an exceptionally high level.

Not one of you has provided a compelling argument as to why a tackle isn't a measure of performance that is any different to any other statistic given all stats can be padded. I would have thought most of you would watch the plays to know that Mayo makes a heap of tackles between the markers and sideline to sideline.

Embarrassing really.

All you are doing is getting pissy while giving Mayo a BJ. You haven't stated why you think tackles are the god of all stats. We are atleast defending our standpoint, WE AGREE THAT MAYO IS A GREAT PLAYER. We do NOT think he is so great because the NFL stat of "tackles" says so. None of us arguing about tackles being a god awful stat are discrediting Mayo, we just aren't giving him a rimjob because of the stat.

What don't you understand about how the stat of tackles can be skewed? Why do you support that stat so hard? What makes it such an accurate definition of skill?

Provide some compelling arguments, and stop falling back to "STOP SAYING MAYO SUX!" because nobody here is saying that.

 

[ausbacker]

No, the point is you're wrong--I see Andy Johnson just made yet another good point about the stat above. Yes, there can be misuses of all stats. But the tackling stat in particular is one that appears to be more malleable than most. What's more, just sniffing, "embarassing really" when guys are making thoughtful posts about it is just sort of silly.

It's not wrong when the other side of the argument cannot construct an argument to disprove why a tackle is any less relevant that a Ben R-Burger TD in junk time at the end of the game.

Not one of you can provide me with enough reason to say that any statistic cannot be applied in context. The fact that it's public knowledge now that teams scheme against Jerod Mayo is the pertinent factor of this argument and until proven otherwise you'll continue to look like an idiot for believing what you do.

 

[ausbacker]

All you are doing is getting pissy while giving Mayo a BJ. You haven't stated why you think tackles are the god of all stats. We are atleast defending our standpoint, WE AGREE THAT MAYO IS A GREAT PLAYER. We do NOT think he is so great because the NFL stat of "tackles" says so. None of us arguing about tackles being a god awful stat are discrediting Mayo, we just aren't giving him a rimjob because of the stat.

What don't you understand about how the stat of tackles can be skewed? Why do you support that stat so hard? What makes it such an accurate definition of skill?

Provide some compelling arguments, and stop falling back to "STOP SAYING MAYO SUX!" because nobody here is saying that.

I don't think tackles are the "God" of stats. Wins are the God of stats. What I have taken umbrage to is downplaying Mayo's ability to make a play given he has 10 team mates who can make the same play on any given down just because it's a tackle.

How that continues to allude some of you is beyond me.

 

[tombonneau]

That's fine but not one of you has stated why a tackle is a misleading or discreditable statistic compared to any other statistic considering they can all be misleading and all have contextual application.

That's the point.

Are you serious? Tackles are notorious for being the one and only subjective statistic in football (only the half-sack comes close). In fact the stat is team reported to the NFL and let's just say they are known to be very generous rewarding half-tackles to players who clean up and jump on a pile.

Right now I would say Mayo is on track to have a career similar to London Fletcher. He's a guy who when healthy is consistently in the top 10 for tackles, a good player with a mice NFL career, but not someone who you would ever had put in the top 5 or even top 10 at the LB position at any point in his career

 

[Ring 6]

It's not wrong when the other side of the argument cannot construct an argument to disprove why a tackle is any less relevant that a Ben R-Burger TD in junk time at the end of the game.

Not one of you can provide me with enough reason to say that any statistic cannot be applied in context. The fact that it's public knowledge now that teams scheme against Jerod Mayo is the pertinent factor of this argument and until proven otherwise you'll continue to look like an idiot for believing what you do.

Just because context must be applied to every statistic does not make every statistic equally valuable in assessing players.
Tackle stats are simply not a good way to rate defensive players for many reasons. I never use them to either support or detract from the evaluation of any player.

 

[Ring 6]

Are you serious? Tackles are notorious for being the one and only subjective statistic in football (only the half-sack comes close). In fact the stat is team reported to the NFL and let's just say they are known to be very generous rewarding half-tackles to players who clean up and jump on a pile.

Right now I would say Mayo is on track to have a career similar to London Fletcher. He's a guy who when healthy is consistently in the top 10 for tackles, a good player with a mice NFL career, but not someone who you would ever had put in the top 5 or even top 10 at the LB position at any point in his career

Your argument, appearing to consider a lot of tackles to be a bad thing is even more foolish than one that says most tackles equals best player.

 

[ausbacker]

Just because context must be applied to every statistic does not make every statistic equally valuable in assessing players.
Tackle stats are simply not a good way to rate defensive players for many reasons. I never use them to either support or detract from the evaluation of any player.

Given Mayo's primary role I think tackles are an effective way of rating his performance. I also think interceptions, sacks and pass defensed are good performance indicators too. One minute a statistic isn't a good measure of performance and next the goal posts change to the application of that statistic needs a contextual meaning. The one reason I am discussing tackles is because Jerod Mayo is making that play. That's it.

Let us push aside the issue of tackles. I'm really not interested in that any further seeing as though not one of you have provided a compelling argument as to why it's not a meaningful event. Let's try something else.

Is Jerod Mayo having a pro-bowl season and has his 2010 performance met the following;

a) performed above expectation
b) performed at expectation
c) performed below expectation

I would argue that Mayo is in serious discussion for the Pro Bowl and that he's performing above expectation. All the statistics count for naught on the "naked eye" test.

 

[tombonneau]

Your argument, appearing to consider a lot of tackles to be a bad thing is even more foolish than one that says most tackles equals best player.

Huh? At one point did I say or infer lots of tackles were bad. Just saying the can be misleading given how they are tracked. Please reread what I wrote but not sure how you got that. Certainly wasn't my intention.

 

[tombonneau]

Given Mayo's primary role I think tackles are an effective way of rating his performance. I also think interceptions, sacks and pass defensed are good performance indicators too. One minute a statistic isn't a good measure of performance and next the goal posts change to the application of that statistic needs a contextual meaning. The one reason I am discussing tackles is because Jerod Mayo is making that play. That's it.

Let us push aside the issue of tackles. I'm really not interested in that any further seeing as though not one of you have provided a compelling argument as to why it's not a meaningful event. Let's try something else.

Is Jerod Mayo having a pro-bowl season and has his 2010 performance met the following;

a) performed above expectation
b) performed at expectation
c) performed below expectation

I would argue that Mayo is in serious discussion for the Pro Bowl and that he's performing above expectation. All the statistics count for naught on the "naked eye" test.

Mayo has a chance to be Pro Bowl backup at ILB. Timmons and Lewis will start. Then probably one if not both of Harris and Scott, and I'd put Mayo in line with Derrick Johnson to compete with the two Jets.

But we could of course also argue the merit of a popularity contest Pro Bowl berth while were at it.

 

[Ring 6]

Given Mayo's primary role I think tackles are an effective way of rating his performance. I also think interceptions, sacks and pass defensed are good performance indicators too. One minute a statistic isn't a good measure of performance and next the goal posts change to the application of that statistic needs a contextual meaning. The one reason I am discussing tackles is because Jerod Mayo is making that play. That's it.

Goal posts moved? Are you kidding me?
The reason it isnt a good indicator of performance is because it needs tobe considered in context.
When we played SD in 2002, Bruschi was out and they ran all over us. People were saying at least Ted Johnson came to play because he had 14 tackles. Then someone reviewed the film and found out they ran directly at him most of the day, he couldnt get off a block until he was blown back and the average gain on those runs that he made the tackle on was more than 8 yards.

Let us push aside the issue of tackles. I'm really not interested in that any further seeing as though not one of you have provided a compelling argument as to why it's not a meaningful event. Let's try something else.

Actually a very compelling argument has been made, you are just not accepting it.

Is Jerod Mayo having a pro-bowl season and has his 2010 performance met the following;

Yes

a) performed above expectation
b) performed at expectation
c) performed below expectation

a

I would argue that Mayo is in serious discussion for the Pro Bowl and that he's performing above expectation. All the statistics count for naught on the "naked eye" test.

I agree. I think Mayo is having a tremendous season. I disagree though that tackle totals have much value by themselves in that discussion.

 

[strngplyr]

Goal posts moved? Are you kidding me?
The reason it isnt a good indicator of performance is because it needs tobe considered in context.
When we played SD in 2002, Bruschi was out and they ran all over us. People were saying at least Ted Johnson came to play because he had 14 tackles. Then someone reviewed the film and found out they ran directly at him most of the day, he couldnt get off a block until he was blown back and the average gain on those runs that he made the tackle on was more than 8 yards.


Actually a very compelling argument has been made, you are just not accepting it.


Yes



a


I agree. I think Mayo is having a tremendous season. I disagree though that tackle totals have much value by themselves in that discussion.

I'm starting to wonder if he just learned the word "compelling" in school. No matter how many arguments are made against the stat, or examples given, he will just be a broken record and repeat "no compelling argument has been made" while failing to give us a reason of why tackles are such a great stat to judge how good a player is.

 

[condon84]

When your defense can't get off the field, your MLB/ILBs ultimately will accumulate tons of tackles simply by the sheer number of plays he's in and the fact that the position ensures that he's either at the point of attack or somewhere close.

 

[ausbacker]

I'd like to thank AndyJohnson and strngplyr for offering no compelling argument as why a tackle isn't a valid statistic whilst attempting to change the validity of a statistic to suit whatever it is you want. The Patriots destroyed the Steelers in week 10 and R-Burger had 387 yards and 3 TD's in junk time. What's the difference when using your rationale for applying context? What's the difference between a 1 yard pass for a TD and a 100 yard pass for a TD under your contextual application? Zero.

Some people just don't get it and you two are leading the pack. I'm rating Mayo on the eye test not any of your contextual bull. I'm rating him on what I've observed during the game. That is it.

 

[Deus Irae]

When your defense can't get off the field, your MLB/ILBs ultimately will accumulate tons of tackles simply by the sheer number of plays he's in and the fact that the position ensures that he's either at the point of attack or somewhere close.

I don't want to jump fully into this thread, but this assertion is not necessarily correct. As has been pointed out, tackles are dictated by a lot of things. If Mayo (he's the example here) is out there, and the opponent is ignoring the pass and abusing the secondary, Mayo's tackle numbers won't see any inflation.

 

[aluminum seats]

I'd like to thank AndyJohnson and strngplyr for offering no compelling argument as why a tackle isn't a valid statistic whilst attempting to change the validity of a statistic to suit whatever it is you want. The Patriots destroyed the Steelers in week 10 and R-Burger had 387 yards and 3 TD's in junk time. What's the difference when using your rationale for applying context? What's the difference between a 1 yard pass for a TD and a 100 yard pass for a TD under your contextual application? Zero.

Some people just don't get it and you two are leading the pack.

As another poster noted, you seem to have recently learned the word "compelling" and are now trying it out. So, that's good for you.

On the argument, you're embarassing yourself by ignoring the myriad points being made about the stat while stomping your feet and asserting other stats are lacking too. That's hardly a compelling argument FOR the stat.

ILBs will typically have the most tackles on defense. Teams that can't get off the field on 3rd down will then require additional tackles on subsequent downs. If a LB is deficient in pass coverage, passes that would otherwise be broken up (or intercepted) will result in a catch and--you guessed it--tackle. LBs who are deficient in pass coverage will likely be targeted by the QB, who will complete passes in the LB's area which will then result in--everyone together now--tackles.

Mayo's a good player for the Pats. Tackles aren't the best stat to show that. Thanks for playing.

 

[Ring 6]

I'd like to thank AndyJohnson and strngplyr for offering no compelling argument as why a tackle isn't a valid statistic whilst attempting to change the validity of a statistic to suit whatever it is you want. The Patriots destroyed the Steelers in week 10 and R-Burger had 387 yards and 3 TD's in junk time. What's the difference when using your rationale for applying context? What's the difference between a 1 yard pass for a TD and a 100 yard pass for a TD under your contextual application? Zero.

Some people just don't get it and you two are leading the pack. I'm rating Mayo on the eye test not any of your contextual bull. I'm rating him on what I've observed during the game. That is it.

OK. Let me explain.
Rberger is not being judged by the yards he passed for in one game he was way behind by anyone. I have continually dismissed those stats having any meaning in discussing the Pats D. You are using context yourself here.
A 1 yd TD and a 100 yd TD are only the same if the only yardstick you look at is TDs. Which shows why it is a poor yardstick by itself.,,,,just like tackles.

Again, you are telling me I don't get it because you are using the eye test when I say I agree he is playing great football, but disagree that you can count up tackles and use that as the means of judging how a LB played.

I've lost track of what point you are arguing here.

 

[Ring 6]

I'd like to thank AndyJohnson and strngplyr for offering no compelling argument as why a tackle isn't a valid statistic whilst attempting to change the validity of a statistic to suit whatever it is you want. The Patriots destroyed the Steelers in week 10 and R-Burger had 387 yards and 3 TD's in junk time. What's the difference when using your rationale for applying context? What's the difference between a 1 yard pass for a TD and a 100 yard pass for a TD under your contextual application? Zero.

Some people just don't get it and you two are leading the pack. I'm rating Mayo on the eye test not any of your contextual bull. I'm rating him on what I've observed during the game. That is it.

Exactly what do you consider a compelling argument?

Its been explained to you that there are many factors that affect tackle statistics that make it obvious that making more tackles doesnt mean you played better. It doesnt get more compelling than that.

 

[Patspsycho]

The scary thing about Mayo is I don't think he even has reached his potential. To me, he is very cerebral and still thinking too much, and there is nothing wrong with that. At least one or two more years and he will be very familiar with the different systems he plays against and will start to play instinctively instead of trying to think so much. Already I am seeing him identify what plays are coming on a regular basis.

I believe that in a year or two, he will master this to such an extent that he will single-handedly be able to ruin game planning against the Pats.

 

[ausbacker]

Exactly what do you consider a compelling argument?

Its been explained to you that there are many factors that affect tackle statistics that make it obvious that making more tackles doesnt mean you played better. It doesnt get more compelling than that.

A compelling argument to me means you can't refute what the other person has said. Given your argument is based on contextual application that makes it opinion based without solid factual basis to support it. At absolutely no point has there been a fact presented to say the tackle statistic needs to be taken in context much like Brady's hail mary end of the 2nd quarter interception needs contextual application.

I don't disagree with you that the application of down, distance, position of a tackle made = a good performance because it doesn't much the same way a junk time TD doesn't make a good performance. What I am arguing is I've watched Jerod Mayo make play after play after play for this team. No contextual application is needed. He's making plays and that's all we can ask.

The next step in Mayo's evolution will be to create more turnovers and possibly add the sacking and interception strings to his bow. He'll be a complete MLB when he does but for now we can't ask for much more from him.