further adventures in Jed York being unsuited for his position
- Member for
- 5 years 23 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|12 hours 22 min ago||This is fair... I take your points... and look forward to 2015||
I appreciate all you've said and learned a ton from your commentary both here and on your site.
Borges was always about the install. We are not hearing that here from Drevno and that's refreshing. It will be interesting to contrast the 2011 season to this year. Borges came in and talked install when he had Denard. Drevno has no starter and is all about playing to the talent. I suppose that is to be expected when you consider that Borges could concentrate on the install without worrying about who would be the starter.
All that said... of course Borges did adapt his playbook for Denard and Devin. The bubble screen meme with Heiko had it's point as well. There are adaptations Borges just did not want to do and didn't. Denard's completion % fall off (and persistent INTs) and Devin's failure to launch make it hard to appreciate what Borges and Nussmeir were attempting. You have stepped into that breech...it's not a fun space to write.
Unlike Chris Brown who cherry picks the latest success and innovation your analysis has focused on the B1G. 2015 should be ripe for the picking.
|21 hours 55 min ago||I found it ...||
It is in the Jan 2014 book Concussions in Athletics : From Brain to Behavior - Steve Broglio and Kevin Guskiewicz wrote the chapter on the Management of Collegiate Sport-Related Concussions. Here is the excerpt I was thinking about...
This goes along with what you are saying about injury tolerance but the numbers are comparable HSFB to CFB. I've emailed Steve but he's pretty busy and my interest is not professional. In fact I've talked to several concussion and CTE experts with a wide variety of responses. Steve Broglio is very well respected. I'd be curious to know if I'm misinterpreting his discussion in this paper. If you see him, mention this to him. I created an email account tss.mgoblog(at)gmail.com. Send me a note if you think about it.
That said there is a huge discrepancy in CFB on reporting. Florida State reported double digit concussions while Oregon, Ohio State and Alabama all reported zero to one. OSUs one being Kosta Karageorge - which didn't become widely known until after his disappearance and death. Accounting for numbers is difficult.
Let me think about this and check on these numbers. They look like they are taken from the early 2000s. If I come up with something that adds value I'll diarize it.
|1 day 6 hours ago||This is in reference to a paper put out by Steven Broglio||
a professor of Kinesiology at Michigan. I will reference for you later tonight. The numbers are old but the incidence has not changed dramatically since.
Numbers here are sketchy which is the gist of this article in the first place.
|1 day 6 hours ago||Nope||
|1 day 6 hours ago||Space - what is up with you today?||
If you don't want to talk football - fine. I take exception to your tone and your logic and your analysis. If your answer is to not play - well that is fine.
Are we back in 5th grade? I'm not throwing shit on a wall to win people over. Is this all about MGo points for you? If so you win. I honestly don't give an ef about that.
I am at work. I do disagree with you . If you want to have a meltdown. Go for it.
If you want to talk football - I will check back - because unlike you - I enjoy talking about football with an open mind. Yours on this issue is not.
By ignoring the passing concepts to make some argument about Borges' untilization of Denard in the running game you are missing the boat. If you want to say Denard was utilized as well under Borges as under RR - you are wrong... in my opinion. Deal with it.
|1 day 6 hours ago||Guilty and I agree with this.||
If this makes Space Coyote happy then peace be with him brother.
|1 day 9 hours ago||I'm going to come back to this later...||
I disagree with you fundamentally here with a few exceptions. But I'm under the gun at the moment. Later tonight.
|1 day 9 hours ago||OK||
I get it.
What I was trying to say was Borges didn't adapt.
RR didn't need to adapt offensively - in my mind. His cupboard was truly bare. His offensive record speaks for itself. I think he would have been able to adapt had Mallett stuck it out.
|1 day 10 hours ago||turd ... look at your data||
Am I missing something?
The story is not questionable and is consistent with my post. There was not an exodus post RR.
|1 day 11 hours ago||I didn't neg here but I think you have the story wrong on Devin||
Gardner didn't fit the system. The system wasn't sound. 27/27.
|1 day 11 hours ago||Agree somewhat but Borges runs vs. RR success fit square to hole||
Denard was on pace to be a monster with RR. Borges stopped his progress and exposed his weakness in passing. Sure Denard beat the running QB record - but in the end from the HB position. RR passed to augment Denard's strengths. Borges ran because it was the only thing working for him. Denard created Borges' success for the most part.
Devin is another story but still doesn't fit squarely to adaptiveness under Borges.
|5 days 7 hours ago||^||
|5 days 8 hours ago||Swagger in Spring/Fall practice is an every year event...||
We always see it. Don't make me show pictures - it's too painful.
This take on practice is slightly different. There is an air of ass kicking competence. I will be shocked if Harbaugh ever refers to practice in a post game interview, but I feel from this post more confident that Michigan is getting its money's worth from the staff.
|1 week 1 day ago||Historical logic doesn't mean much at this point at least||
There's a new coach in town who didn't recruit Morris or any of the possible QB cadidates (in spring ball at least) to start in the fall. This in the backdrop of a program and sport where success is directly proportional to your starting QB.
In this context, logic based on past performance or ratings is close to meaningless.
|1 week 1 day ago||Legit - the ratings aren't necessarily a criteria of legitomacy||
This varies by position and drive in the HS athletes to camp. Morris had a singular drive that drove him to Texas to try out for the Elite 11. Does that make him less a 97 than Peppers is a 100? No, but his rating is a hard earned rating.
Offensive linemen are another world all together. The physical skills required of CFB linemen are nascent to say the most in high school. Ratings in this group are an order of magnitude less legit than at CB or WR.
|1 week 4 days ago||Awesome work.||
This makes up for an otherwise unappreciated Sunday in the office.
|1 week 5 days ago||I was curious what your take would be on the CTE diary...||
The moral implication is one with which truly I grapple. It's a sociological confustifying vortex of issues. During the holidays I got into this with Wolverine1987 in a gladiatorial vein. Sal Quattro was highly skeptical both there and in the post leading up to this diary - taking my light hearted tone for subjectivism. But it was a post at the end of that thread where an analogy was made to a raisin that made me go "guh". That is what got me to write the diary.
I wrote Bob Stern when I posted the piece to get his feedback. He shares the moral concerns. He has been outspoken against the NFL player settlement. The chaotic nature of the break of this story is fascinating and the portrayal and role of science disturbing.
All that said my personal interest is large in the AFE debate. There are far more football vets like myself who have never played a down of college ball for whom the story has meaning...not to mention the kids.
|1 week 6 days ago||Fair enough... Spearman's Rho is not sensitive to the exact||
concerns you raise.
I don't worry too much about how I come off on this blog. These types of back and forth refine my thought, broaden my knowledge and push the topic. I appreciate your time, demeanor and the clarity.
MGoBlog allows a dialogue that holds the OP accountable (including Brian i.e. his Brandon take down and follow) and allows the reader to come to terms without a one and done self validating read through which is standard operating procedure with most media. I'm thankful for that.
|1 week 6 days ago||Beer in hand... suppose the staging is arbitrary...||
why is the correlation so high for age at death? The researchers use Spearman's rho for a correlation check. The correlation is greatest of all variables for age at death (.806) with p<.0001. Why so high? Given the small sample size and large confidence intervals that is a very high correlation. If the staging is arbitrary and the x axis is ordinal I would expect a marginal correlation.
CTE is known to be progressive. The linearity of the staging vs. age at death suggests that McKee got the staging right.
Besides the stats though... the criteria, microscopic and macroscopic images pass the sniff test. It's not clear to me that there isn't some quantifiable measure even in the slides.
Even if the staging is arbitrary the correlation is real. if the correlation is real the extrapolation is not unreasonable. Is it a done deal? No. Like I said in the post... these are cross sectional studies that do not prove cause ... but do find causal relationships.
In the second study a major finding is the correlation of age at death and pathological stage.
Staging for CTE based on post mortem is kind of ridiculous wrt other diseases. There is no real therapeutic or prognostic value when there is no treatment (besides possibly an untested method championed by Bernie Kosar) nor in vivo diagnostic test (besides the promising PET scan marker I mentioned earlier.) McKee stages the disease to enable later studies to build and refine the staging criteria for possible interventions.
This and other studies are bedrock templates for contact athletes who no longer play to begin to ask the questions and come to terms with the possibility that they could have CTE.
No the extrapolation does not prove CTE starts at 11.75 years of age. If you do the regression on the high and low CI that would be a margin between 27.5 years old to ... wait for it ... - 4.25 years old. Yes negative. As I said before negative values don't make sense here though. That on average this comes to 11.75 wrt the fist study is interesting however.
Regardless of the x intercept contact athletes are contracting this disease early in their lives... on this at least let us find common ground. CTE doesn't spring up at stage I without some latency. As McKee mentions there are reasons to believe that the progress of the disease is slower in some of the subjects. The early pre stage I phase post the initial trauma may be a completely different kettle of fish with respect to the growth and spread of the disease. As I also said earlier... Denard didn't win the Heisman in 2010 based on his first 5 games... extrapolation = caveat emptor.
|2 weeks 9 hours ago||We agree it's not random and is ordered - let's drink beer||
Unfortunately I can't drink beer now, but I will around 9PM tonight pacific...in case you are checking this thread.
|2 weeks 9 hours ago||Or just be comfortable...||
Suh's Zubaz are specifically designed to make him look skinny... or is that fat.
Uh...on second thought... no amount of vertical lines are going to make Suh look fat just more intimidating.
|2 weeks 11 hours ago||S&C is year round||
There is no limit on access for conditioning or stretching for that matter.
|2 weeks 11 hours ago||If you want to question McKee's staging - go nuts||
The criteria for staging is explicit and verified by two other pathologists in the study. But don't depict the criteria as random or arbitrary. It is neither one.
|2 weeks 11 hours ago||Try using the disney regression below -15.9*Donald = my point||
The regression is to the ordinal scale. If there were 8 stages the slope would be ~8.
You can't change the data/relationship between the variables. I could graph stages 1, 1.5, 2 and 2.5 but like I said before the mean ages would change - not to mention I don't have that data.
I can extrapolate to stage 0 or stage 5 or interpolate to 1.5 or 3.96748. I can't change the nature of what a stage is (as determined by a team of pathologists) or the mean age of the subjects by stage.
Humans are pattern recognition machines. Correlating ordinal independent variables to reality is discriminant analysis. That is what staging is in this biomedical context.
|2 weeks 12 hours ago||Candy and nuts||
|2 weeks 19 hours ago||It's not about grouping the data...||
it's about displaying the data we have which is coming from the microscope and in the case of the later stages the naked eye. Marrying the data to the case histories shows that CTE is a progressive disease.
Stage I = Foci of p-tau tangles
Stage II = Multiple discrete foci of p-tau tangles
Stage III=Widespread tangles throughout the brain
Stage IV=Severe p-tau abnormailities throughout the brain (but oddly not so much the visual cortex...that is weird??)
And your suggesting creating a stage V composed of the sickest group of stage IV subjects. Hmm. OK. That would be your 95 y.o. on average with very little working brain. You start to lose people here to CTE and natural causes.
Whatever stages you map out the relationship between the progression of CTE and age of each subject wrt to their pathological stage is not going to be any different regardless of how many stages you stipulate.
|2 weeks 20 hours ago||And now by disney character in order of popularity|
|2 weeks 20 hours ago||Here you go..|
|2 weeks 1 day ago||I'll do this tonight when I get home... a rose is a rose however||
it won't change the scale which is ordinal as determined from the mean ages. The stages are noted in roman numerals which is used often and in this case to designate ordinality. The naming convention of the stages has nothing to do with scale.
Ideally we would have an infinite number of stages with a continuous response in age of subject. Staging in medicine wrt disease has an interesting history. Staging in this paper is very precise and was verified by two other pathologists in the study. If another stage made sense I'm sure they would do it. Note stage IV subjects don't do to well so a stage V is unlikely. On the other side however, given the progressive model a stage 0 isn't unreasonable.
It wil not be until 10PM pacific at the earliest - FYI
|2 weeks 1 day ago||But the mean values would change ...||
with the new criteria for the new staging regime. 1.5 would probably be very near an interpolation of 1 and 2...
The mean age data comes from the distribution of the stage sample of subjects ...