LIST OF WWE PERSONNEL?!?
- Member for
- 5 years 23 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|12 hours 11 min ago||^||
|12 hours 22 min 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.
|3 days 17 hours 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.
|3 days 18 hours 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.
|6 days 10 hours ago||Awesome work.||
This makes up for an otherwise unappreciated Sunday in the office.
|1 week 12 hours 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 1 day 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 2 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.
|1 week 2 days 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.
|1 week 2 days 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.
|1 week 2 days ago||S&C is year round||
There is no limit on access for conditioning or stretching for that matter.
|1 week 2 days 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.
|1 week 2 days 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.
|1 week 2 days ago||Candy and nuts||
|1 week 3 days 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.
|1 week 3 days ago||And now by disney character in order of popularity|
|1 week 3 days ago||Here you go..|
|1 week 3 days 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
|1 week 3 days 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 ...
|1 week 3 days ago||Teams come and go but the Washtenaw Jr Wolverines still exist...||
I played QB on the Jr Wolverines in the 70s opposite one Jr. Packer team that in my 12th year did not even make the championship which we won. Glory days.
|1 week 3 days ago||What is the difference between naming a stage 1.5 and III?||
Changing scale doesn't change the relationship between variables. The regression formula will be different but the intercept will approximate the same result.
|1 week 3 days ago||Let's break it up into 8 stages...||
0.5, 1, 1.5, 2,2.5, 3, 3.5 and 4. This adds a stage lower than 1 but we could do it however we like. The important thing is to correctly classify each subject to the pathological criteria which in this case would be a transitional stage between the existing non fractional stages. That gives the quantitative matching that you mentioned.
If we assume that the regression remains linear then the 0.5 group comes in ~8 years younger than the stage 1 group on average. Data points would likely fall randomly between the higher and lower stages giving roughly the same line. After all the data is the same whether we cut it 4 ways or into an infinite and continuous numerical score of CTE-ness. Granted there will be more noise with more stages but it will be approximate to the four point line. I don't see how an 8 stage cut of the same data is going to nearly double the slope.
If I had the data itself I could do something else with it. But I only have the mean and confidence interval for the stages defined.
In the mean time, pun intended, you can extrapolate a line from this...
to get a stage zero or extrapolate a heisman from Denard's first 5 games of 2010 for that matter. Extrapolation does not always work. As I have said before the confidence intervals are too wide to put much credibility into this GRC... but it's interesting and instructive.
The x intercept of any of these hypothetical myriad stages and linear models would always be non negative, unless we induce CTE in the womb. More data will tell the story.
Plotting the categorical data vs. time of death is problematic for CTE. Though it's likely Joseph Chernach's death is somewhat CTE related - CTE does not kill in general. Instead it denigrates quality of life for the most part. It is unlikely a pathologist would look for CTE in a teenager to diagnose a 0.5 stage brain. There are half the number of stage I brains compared to the other stages with or without any fractional breakdown. Stage IV subjects are older and bounded by natural death as well as failure to thrive. Waiting for a donor to die is a non random sampling strategy.
UCLA has a patent on a PET scan marker for Tau protien that has already diagnosed Tony Dorsett and other NFL vets with CTE. These are later stages but perhaps they will be able to perform these tests reliably on non symptomatic players and bring a real focus on the extent of CTE - supposedly affecting from 3.5% to as much as 30% of all current NFL players depending on whose projections you use.
|1 week 4 days ago||You got me on this one.||
I hadn't read that tweet or some of the other links. Having seen the hit I find it hard to believe he stayed in the game, but he certainly went through the protocol. It would have been better to have pulled him immediately instead of after the series. I'm unclear if there is a procedure to pull someone from a game or if they have to wait for a break in the action.
|1 week 4 days ago||Check out page 4||
of the study. I can paste data but not discussion due to copyright (I'm pretty sure that is right - better to be safe than sorry.) Stamm suggests several models for this. Personally I have no idea but I'm reading about this myself at the moment trying to understand.
I'm also very interested in the progression of the disease. I'm not sure how that works either. Any clues on that from readers would be appreciated.
|1 week 4 days ago||The stages are ordinal wrt mean age of subject - quantitatively||
That is what allows this admittedly imprecise but accurate extrapolation. It's a gross reality check that the underlying hypothesis in the first study is in the initial study of the spectrum of CTE demographic.
Yes negative intercept is possible if the relation is not linear. But it isn't ... which is interesting if not significant.
|1 week 4 days ago||Like I said... it's a cross sectional study.||
Does it prove cause. No. Does it find cause. Yes.
If cross sectional study is "poor" by definition then I can't argue that point. There is a good reason this study was done as it was given the resources and money we have now.
Note Stamm used established neuropsychological tests that can be compared to larger population norms. All subjects were below average in this respect.
Unfortunately the issue of mTBI is not restricted to football. If it were, we might never get a "rich" study done. The military has great need to actually determine the effect of long term mTBI. That will certainly provide answers in the long run. As a parent, I can't wait for that.
I also work in a technical field where design of experiment is paramount. Public health doesn't operate in that zone. Case controled studies are not initailly or ever possible for ethical, monetary, social or practical reasons.
What is your judgment sj? When kids can play team sports that don't involve contact like that dictated in tackle football (like Ultimate or Flag Football) does your son don the helmet or not? Troy Aikman and Terry Bradshaw say no. They don't need studies period. What do you say?
|1 week 4 days ago||Extrapolation - the staging is based on pathology not symptoms||
The case histories and symptoms were gathered blindly and independently from the pathology reports as well. The age at time of death is the only case history data drawn here to perform the extrapolation. Each subject is a snapshot of the stage of CTE at time of death.
Extrapolation can work with categorical measurement with or without variance over time as long as there is an ordinal relationship - in this case born out in the data and captured in the excel table. The staging linearity is real and even responds to the variance.
Is it QED. No it is not. Is it a model that makes sense. Yes it is.
Regardless of model or sense - the uncertainty is huge. All caveats apply.
|1 week 5 days ago||It may seem hopeless but I like the Browns||
Defense is the cornerstone here.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||Harbaugh remembers...||
When was the last time we had a S&C coach run with the team? I'm sure they do it but seeing Gittleson doing it is fun for some nostalgic reason.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||Attitude > Altitude||
If Michigan wins this then it's going to be a media circus of expectation and Harbaugh swag.
I can't wait for spring... time is going so slowly. I'm going to bed right now so I can wake up and get tomorrow over with as soon as possible.