...how this defense can practice against such an ace-in-the-hole offense week in and week out and yet still lose contain on the edges.
You'd think that sort of thing would be exposed in practice more often, given our personnel.
I think we got at least one offsides call against Indiana from them trying to jump the snap count. However, I'm not sure if that means (a) our snap count is sufficiently random that trying to jump it was a punishment, or (b) we're mostly predictable and we happened to get lucky.
Obviously everyone tries to figure out and jump the opponent's snap, so maybe it's a little of both. Hopefully our coaches remember last year and have been saving up their snap-count-ju-jitsu for debut this week.
...but it seems flawed to me.
The whole point of the Hennechart is to measure QB performance independent of receivers. This is (for the most part) easily done if you watch the play--a ball that hits a receiver in the chest should be caught, and if it isn't, you don't want to penalize the QB for it in his stats.
The statistical measurements you're looking at correlating with (completion percentage and QB rating) are conflated with receiver's stats too. A drop will show up in the QB's completion percentage, but not in the Hennechart. That's the whole *point* of the Hennechart.
So seeing ~80% correlation to completion is actually almost perfect--you could go further with this and try to show that 20% of the Hennechart score is either a) dropped balls that aren't penalized in the Hennechart, or b) marginal balls that got caught but are still penalized.
60% to QB rating isn't bad, but QB ratings never made that much sense to me (the formula is 'pretty' but weird).
In short, I'm not sure you'll get much better correlation than what you have now, but I'm not sure that what you're testing can tell you if the Hennechart is 'valid' or not. It has an essentially different purpose than the factors you're comparing against. Remember, 'time of posessesion' is a time-tested 'statistic' too :)
"I thought D-Rob's Speed was greatly underrated"
Isn't that just about all that anyone talks about?
If anything I'd say that the coaches were correct in saying it was his throwing that was underrated. Granted, he wasn't selecting the best receivers, but when he let it rip D. Rob seemed like he could be a decent passer eventually.
I read the board a lot but post rarely. Check my "joined" date vs. my point total. To date the points system has shut me out of creating a new topic.
That said... I don't often have the urge to create one, so it's not like the system is depriving the site of anything particularly insightful. It's more of a "user experience" turnoff. Trolls are too, so they kind of cancel each other out.
That said 20 points is low and achievable, 200 points would basically lifetime ban me from creating a new forum topic. I'm not an active poster, but a man who's read the blog for for years likes to be able to post if he wants to, you know?
If your team had an awful year and so you're trying to get press on the things you changed to make this year better, highlighting what you did differently seems clutch.
Stevie Brown, Sr., LB/S
Brown seems like a good way to get some publicity on that. Media event + "look shiny new position" = free coverage, particularly in the offseason where reporters are desperate for anything to latch on to.
I rather adore my maize hockey jersey. To be fair, I'll admit that maize on a backdrop of white is significantly different than on a backdrop of green, so I agree that maize jerseys + football = bad. But still... the maize jersey hate is a little stiff on #8...
I'd never heard of Stylish before, so this is a double winner entry. I can think of more pages I'd love to use this on...
Like Slauncha I played with it a little bit (made it a tiny bit wider even still), but overall GREAT!
Recent Comments
Look, our helmet's got WINGS!
Who could not love that?