Here's the crux of what I "think" MF is doing.
He's basing "turnovers are the worst thing you can do" and you get 12 possessions a game.
Both, are assumptions.
Not all TO's are the same. I've stressed that from jump.
You get 12 possessions (not always true) and 1 INT per game. That's 11 other possessions. Well, teams only average 28ish points a game, or 4 scores. That's 7 punts, or maybe a fumble, maybe end of half, game, etc.
What if the INT was 3rd and long, and ends the half?
What if INT leads to no points?
How are they "worse" than a punt?
They aren't equal.
Russ threw 4 in a game, and won.
Tannehill had zero last week, and lost to the Jags.
You're putting your assumptions/feelings/beliefs on turnovers, but not actual evidence.
In general, sure, TO's are bad. Absolutely. But not EVERY TO is. So 1 a game, maybe only 12 hurt. Or 7. Or maybe all 16, you aren't using context when you blanket statement, "turnovers are the worst thing you can do".
Peyton threw a pick six last week, and won. Mistakes can be overcome.
You're trying to make Luck some turnover machine, but it simply isn't true.
On Monday EVERYONE was picking the Colts, STILL, when it was 10-7. Luck already had 3 TO's, people still pickin the Colts to win.
You can't blanket 16 INT's in 16 games and say all of them are bad, or worse than the 6-7 punts per game What if there's a punt return for a TD?
Didn't Luck have 3 picks, and was down like 38-7 vs Chiefs, and won?
I've given 100 examples, context, stats, per game averages, totals, 50 game windows, everything.
You have 12 possessions per game, turnovers worst thing ever, 1 per game too much, and attempts per game don't matter.
Look at those differences.
