Fumbles lost are literally right below the title. You had to click on the title to get into the thread, actively ignore that the context you’re asking for is there and then make this comment.
Correct. I point that out. Fumbles lost should be in the title not in the comment section. The title is using inconsistent metrics to make a disingenuous point
The title is pushing an inconsistent narrative. They could have made the same point using fumbles lost. Or they could have made a point of turnover worthy plays which actually helps Allens case even more.
Using total fumbles is extremely disingenuous. Fumbles lost should be in your title.
Fumbles lost are literally right below the title. You had to click on the title to get into the thread, actively ignore that the context you’re asking for is there and then make this comment.
Correct. I point that out. Fumbles lost should be in the title not in the comment section. The title is using inconsistent metrics to make a disingenuous point
It’s disingenuous to ask to read one more line of text?
The title is pushing an inconsistent narrative. They could have made the same point using fumbles lost. Or they could have made a point of turnover worthy plays which actually helps Allens case even more.
Fumble recoveries are largely luck
Not on dropped snaps missed handoffs. Offensive predominantly recover those.
Also there is luck with interceptions as well but this isn’t including dropped interceptions. It’s using inconsistent metrics.