(10-15-2016, 06:14 PM)BurgXXIII link Wrote:[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=15912.msg175840#msg175840 date=1476579998]
I've never claimed Burns is the answer; simply that he's better than Chryst. Overall he strikes me as much too inconsistent. His accuracy comes and goes.
There are many many threads in which the statistics of small sample sizes are carefully discussed. Why doesn't that apply in this case? It seems to me that Burns can never be successful until he stops obviously fixating on the first option in pass plays. Doug Flutie mentioned this, as well.
[/quote]
It's a fair point, but the people who made the decision have a lot more data points than we do. Sure, it is possible that with more time out there, Chryst would rise to the occasion. It's also possible that because he only has one series, that Chryst is pushing too hard. So, yeah, it is possible that Chryst would be better, but there is no evidence that he is, and the admittedly weak evidence is that he is not.
BC