Again, I'm not a Cousins apologist. That should be clear by now. I do not think he's great. I do think he has flaws that hold him back from being as good as his physical skills and intellect should allow. I happen to believe those flaws are mental, not his intellect, but his tendency to panic when things break down, and his tendency to play worse when faced with adversity such as an interception.StumpHunter wrote: ↑Sun Apr 10, 2022 9:45 pmI follow the scientific method:VikingsVictorious wrote: ↑Sun Apr 10, 2022 9:12 pm
When you look for stats to confirm what you are saying you lose any shred of credibility. You need to look for the stats then come up with your theory. Not come up with your theory and then look for the stats that back your theory up. You've already admitted that's how you do it so you can't put that genie back in the bottle. I've never made anything up. I look at the big picture and realize we have a good QB.1) I observe Cousins being a .500 QB and ask why?The six steps of the scientific method include: 1) asking a question about something you observe, 2) doing background research to learn what is already known about the topic, 3) constructing a hypothesis, 4) experimenting to test the hypothesis, 5) analyzing the data from the experiment and drawing conclusions, and 6) communicating the results to others.
2) I do research to see what is already known about him losing half his starts
3) I construct a hypothesis that he just isn't good enough to overcome any sort of obstacle
4) I collect the stats in wins and losses, who the opponent is, what sort of obstacles he would have to overcome, etc.
5) I analyze the data and draw a conclusion that Cousins is indeed a .500 QB, because that is how he plays
6) I communicate here what I have found, much to the chagrin of fans who would like to pretend he is great despite the evidence pointing to different conclusion.
But you are not following the scientific method. Your bias shows through, which negates anything resembling the scientific method. Every post you make about Cousins is either highly negative, or along the lines of "well he can do that, BUT it's offset by his tendency to suck." That's not scientific.
Also, anyone who purports to use the scientific method has to be able to stand up to the scrutiny of his peers. That's ALSO part of Step 6. Sorry dude, but we're your peers. Your comment "much to the chagrin of fans who would like to pretend he is great" shows me that you're not open to an opposing argument. In all the years I've seen you on this board, you never have been. I have never seen you change your mind on anything or adjust any hypothesis you've stated.
You use stats to back your arguments. But it's not the scientific method.