Hansen

[Blue In BC]

It's always hard to see performance on ST's for any player.  I only saw the one play. Maybe I should have used grades for what posters felt about his performance.

A simple yes or no might suffice. Some elaboration / specific views that can be supported?

Player grade. Unknown.

[Blueforlife]

Player grade B+

[Sir Blue and Gold]

We gave up 37 points, 548 net yards of offense, 36 first downs and over 40 minutes in time of possession.

Alexander went 30/40 for 440 yards.
Philpot had 207 yards receiving.

We didn't get a defensive stop until almost halftime.

Hansen made a great play on third and short. Once. Who cares?

And while I'm on a rant, this debate is absurd and this trend of starting polls to prove yourself right in discussions from other threads is stupid. We're going to have 45 polls started by 2 people convincing themselves how right they are at any given time. Can I start a poll on how dumb that is?

[Blue In BC]

We gave up 37 points, 548 net yards of offense, 36 first downs and over 40 minutes in time of possession.

Alexander went 30/40 for 440 yards.
Philpot had 207 yards receiving.

We didn't get a defensive stop until almost halftime.

Hansen made a great play on third and short. Once. Who cares?

And while I'm on a rant, this debate is absurd and this trend of starting polls to prove yourself right in discussions from other threads is stupid. We're going to have 45 polls started by 2 people convincing themselves how right they are at any given time. Can I start a poll on how dumb that is?

That's not accurate at all. One poster was positive he played well. I said I didn't see anything one way or the other to claim he had either a good or a bad game. In that sense I have nothing to prove.  I simply asked what that was based on that was seen.

A simple answer might have been I saw him flatten the gunner on our 1st two punt returns if that was seen.

That's no different than debating whether D. Brown had a good or bad game. The variables whether play calling, OL blocking or just lack of TOP come into that discussion.

We've already had significant debate whether Brown is the answer going forward after every game. All year we discussed whether we should be starting a 3rd import receiver. It's a debate based on a combination of opinions supported by examples of good plays or bad plays actually seen.

The week has had significant discussion ( including a poll ) on whether we think we could or should trade Brady. That's not a prove one side right or wrong but seeking an opinion with reasoning one way or another.

It's a simple test to see what the majority thinks about possible changes or an evaluation of the performance of players or coaches.

Nothing new about that.

[Jesse]

I gotta say, I also think these yes/no polls to settle a topic are pretty dumb and I never vote in them.

[Blueforlife]

I like all polls, I found them informative and they often bring a good specific debate.  Some don't like them and I think some are a little harsh here as BnBC was curious on this topic.  If you don't like the poll, you don't have to vote and you certainly don't have to trash it.  I am curious on what folks seen in Hansen's 1st game back, commenting on fringe players contribution is a great part of this forum and a good way to get informed especially when attending games in person where you don't always get the dets.

If you don't like yes no then put your player grade in.

Polls are not about being right, its about getting the groups opinion.

I don't believe folks should discourage any posts, polls, etc. as long as it follows the rules, this place is awesome because everyone has a voice and there isn't a right or wrong way to post on here, diversity is king.

TLB and I were impressed by Hansen.  BnBC needed proof and wasn't so sure.  More info is appreciated.

That's not accurate at all. One poster was positive he played well. I said I didn't see anything one way or the other to claim he had either a good or a bad game. In that sense I have nothing to prove.  I simply asked what that was based on that was seen.

A simple answer might have been I saw him flatten the gunner on our 1st two punt returns if that was seen.

That's no different than debating whether D. Brown had a good or bad game. The variables whether play calling, OL blocking or just lack of TOP come into that discussion.

We've already had significant debate whether Brown is the answer going forward after every game. All year we discussed whether we should be starting a 3rd import receiver. It's a debate based on a combination of opinions supported by examples of good plays or bad plays actually seen.

The week has had significant discussion ( including a poll ) on whether we think we could or should trade Brady. That's not a prove one side right or wrong but seeking an opinion with reasoning one way or another.

It's a simple test to see what the majority thinks about possible changes or an evaluation of the performance of players or coaches.

Nothing new about that.

Well said, well written agree most

I was surprised some voted to trade Brady, didn't expect that or though maybe one or two.  Polls are neat because of that.  They can inform and surprise.  This one doesn't have enough responses to make any concussions (yet).  Some polls are popular and others fizzles.  There is an art to a good poll and I have learned to try to make them better by listening what folks wanted for voting options and sometimes I adjust them as I go as needed.

All this poll talk makes me want make a poll asking if people like polls lol or what kind lol

[Tecno]

And while I'm on a rant, this debate is absurd and this trend of starting polls to prove yourself right in discussions from other threads is stupid. We're going to have 45 polls started by 2 people convincing themselves how right they are at any given time. Can I start a poll on how dumb that is?

Polls are fine.  Easy to dodge it if you want.  The icon shows you it's a poll.  Just ignore it if you don't like it.

It is an ok way to distill the "my faction of forum members is bigger than your faction!" down to a number.

However, to keep from seeming biased you have to be careful on the choices and wording.  For this one I'd lump the "1 big play" choice in with "yes", whereas I'm sure you meant it to mean more of a "no".

Perhaps the better question is: did Hansen have more of an impact than Boulaine or whoever would have had, had they had that final NAT ST spot... And the answer to THAT question is Most Definitely, because the bubble STer this season has done all of bupkis in the "boost morale" play department.

To put it in perspective, what did Stuart or Shay do?  Ya...

[Blue In BC]

Polls are fine.  Easy to dodge it if you want.  The icon shows you it's a poll.  Just ignore it if you don't like it.

It is an ok way to distill the "my faction of forum members is bigger than your faction!" down to a number.

However, to keep from seeming biased you have to be careful on the choices and wording.  For this one I'd lump the "1 big play" choice in with "yes", whereas I'm sure you meant it to mean more of a "no".

Perhaps the better question is: did Hansen have more of an impact than Boulaine or whoever would have had, had they had that final NAT ST spot... And the answer to THAT question is Most Definitely, because the bubble STer this season has done all of bupkis in the "boost morale" play department.

To put it in perspective, what did Stuart or Shay do?  Ya...

There's a lot to take in about this post.

Hansen made a great play but I'd say it fell into the defensive category. Yes it had a great moral impact and is one of those plays that at times is the difference between winning and losing.  It doesn't change the aspect of whether he had a good game or not.

Bombers have rotated in a bunch of players in the ST group. Often because of injury. Several players have made big hits on coverage teams. Many have made great blocks, opened lanes or collapsed wedges ete etc and those don't always get noticed.

As far as the " 1 play choice " I disagree it should have fallen directly into yes. My wording only says that was the play I saw and I had nothing more to choose between a flat out yes or no.

He may have made significant ST plays and even though nothing was mentioned during the broadcast, it doesn't mean he made an impact. The guys in the trenches don't always get the glory or recognition.

There were over 20 ST plays, punts, K/O coverage and return duty. I think we'd be hard pressed to say who was on which function for most of the 12 on the field.

Cadwallader is always visible on coverage ST plays even when he doesn't make the specific tackle. He's in the mix. I thought Ball should some good work but has suffered injuries. Ditto for Clark.

[Blueforlife]

Polls are fine.  Easy to dodge it if you want.  The icon shows you it's a poll.  Just ignore it if you don't like it.

It is an ok way to distill the "my faction of forum members is bigger than your faction!" down to a number.

However, to keep from seeming biased you have to be careful on the choices and wording.  For this one I'd lump the "1 big play" choice in with "yes", whereas I'm sure you meant it to mean more of a "no".

Perhaps the better question is: did Hansen have more of an impact than Boulaine or whoever would have had, had they had that final NAT ST spot... And the answer to THAT question is Most Definitely, because the bubble STer this season has done all of bupkis in the "boost morale" play department.

To put it in perspective, what did Stuart or Shay do?  Ya...

agree all, polls always have a slight bias in their wording and it's art to eliminate it, this one was a little skewed but still interesting and has brought a good discussion which is often > than the poll itself

very insightful post, make a good point about how he played vs. other options or other on the AR, when a guy can come on and pop and make a play one game in, that means a great deal, some of these guys won't pop all year, part of the role of a bench or ST guy but the good ones remind you why they are there

I am still learning how to do a good poll, takes time and helps when people chime in on what can be better next time

Cadwallader is always visible on coverage ST plays even when he doesn't make the specific tackle. He's in the mix. I thought Ball should some good work but has suffered injuries. Ditto for Clark.

very good points