I read an article today. It was about Quarterbacks.

And it was written by Scouts Inc!

The title is: In updated QB rankings, Eli Manning rises, Quinn falls

Here are some things I read in the article:

"Brady Quinn's ranking plummeted from No. 37 to No. 58 because he barely saw the field."

"About the only thing we agreed on was that Tom Brady was No. 1 and Peyton Manning was No. 2."

""The top 10 was very difficult after we got through the top five."

"Despite losing several key players to injury, Manning still completed 65.4 percent of his passes and threw 31 TDs."

"There is no longer a debate over who the best QB in the NFL is -- Brady has moved ahead of Manning."

"Favre made every player on the offense better."

"[Romo] is mentally tough"

Roethlisberger has responded with improved leadership.

"[Hasselbeck] is a rhythm passer who can be a little streaky."

"Brees is not the type of player who can carry a team without solid weapons around him."

"When healthy, McNabb has shown he can still be an elite starting QB."

"The last time he played a 16-game season was 2003."

"[Eli] lacks that emotional drive that gets you excited."

This one is the best:

"[Vince Young] didn't have much success in 2007 because former offensive coordinator Norm Chow's game plans didn't always take advantage of Young's strengths as much as they did in 2006."

And the best of the rest:

"Physically, none of his traits stand out, but he is not a major liability in any one area, either."

Guess who that guy is. Give up? Whatever, it's not important.

"The number of interceptions remain worrisome."

Same Guy.

"Starting quarterbacks are hard to find."

"[Clemens] has a lot of upside"

The Russell saga:

"[Russell] was the first overall choice in the 2007 draft for a reason."

"He didn't play all that much football at LSU compared to other top prospects."

"But wow, is he intriguing."

Why we love Steve McNair:


"On guts alone, he threw for over 1,000 yards this season."

Just a few more:

"[Sorgi] has a fragile-looking frame"

"He was pulled from a game by coach Belichick after throwing an interception, so it's obvious Cassel is not ready to be a starter for any NFL team."

"While [Quinn] showed flashes of potential in the preseason, whether that translates well in the regular season is unknown."

Just remember their position on this guy:

"[Russell] was the first overall choice in the 2007 draft for a reason."

"Wow, is [Russell} intriguing."

Consistently Moronic

Just to prove how blatantly wrong Joe Buck is, I will write this entire post like a bad 7th grade essay:

Consistency, what is it? Merriam-Webster's online dictionary defines it, in definition 2a, as "marked by harmony, regularity, or steady continuity : free from variation or contradiction". One might say, therefore that to be inconsistent is to change frequently, for instance be different from one week to the next.

However, I will show that morons and overpaid analysts think consistent just means good. To show this, I will cite Joe Buck during the Giants-Buccaneers game (on Eli Manning): "He wasn't inconsistent last week against the Patriots!! OMGLOL!" (OMGLOL being the best possible transcription of Joe Buck's excitement at himself). You can't of course, be "consistent" in a sample size of one. You can be "good" but you can't be marked by regularity or steady continuity in a sample size of one!

In conclusion, Joe Buck is a pretty crappy analyst. But don't think Joe Buck is a bad man. There are many bad analysts that think consistency means good. Of course, these people forget that if the baseline is #35 this year in DVOA and #25 in QB Rating (as Manning is) then inconsistent is good. The Giants should pray before each game that Manning be inconsistent with the way he played this season. Therefore, this is proof that "consistency" says nothing about quality, just about repetition. Luckily for the Giants, Eli Manning is playing pretty inconsistently good today.

Wait! There's More!

Scouts Inc. watches games, breaks down film and studies football from all angles for ESPN.com.-Article Footnote

They watch the games! Holy crap. I guess if you watch the games, you are instantly qualified to begin a business selling expert information to the public at a fee. I'm gonna have to get Robocats on the horn, there's a living to be had here.

Anyway, they ranked all the playoff teams in the most intelligent manner one could think of: they gave them a number ranking (quantity 1:12), broke it down by position, and got really tricky when they summoned the gods of addition to come up with an end result. That's right: Scouts Inc. has a team evaluation system that involves not one, but each and every fault of general analysis:

-no scale
-no average or control group
-assumption of equidistant skill level seperation...
-between all tweleve teams...
-at every postion...
-assumption of equivlent position value
-assumption that coach value is perfectly equal to any other position...
-like Quarterback for example

and of course the clincher:

-totally subjective rankings to ensure that no two intelligent people could ever agree on the same rankings.

What I am about to show you here is only their defensive rankings of the twelve playoff teams. Rest assured that the rest of their crap is more of the same.

Anyway, here are the Football Outsiders numbers for all of the defensive data from 2007. FO has about 1/4 the resources of Scouts Inc, works half as hard, and knows roughly thirty eight times more about football.

You don't have to be a big fan of DVOA to use it for a loose standard of actual real defensive power rankings. Here are the 12 playoff teams ranked in order of defensive effeciency (in bold):

1. Tennessee -13.5%
2. Pittsburgh -12.5%
3. Indianapolis -10.8%
4. Tampa Bay -10.2%
5. San Diego -9.8%
6. Washington -7.2%
7. New England -6.1%
8. Dallas -5.8%
9. Seattle -5.4%
10. Jacksonville -3.3%
11. New York Giants -2.9%
12. Green Bay Packers -1.3%


And the Scouts Inc rankings:

1. Dallas Cowboys 12
1. Green Bay Packers 12
3. San Diego Chargers 13
4. New England Patriots 14
5. Indianapolis Colts 18
5. Seattle Seahawks 18
7. Pittsburgh Steelers 20
8. Tennessee Titans 21
9. Tampa Bay Buccaneers 24
10. New York Giants 25
11. Jacksonville Jaguars 27
12. Washington Redskins 30

That's actually correct, Football Outsiders system which uses every play of the season as a data point ranks Green Bay's defense as the least effective. Scouts Inc, which uses some anonymous dudes' "professional" opinion, finds them to be the best.

Great system.

This one makes me Smile a little Bit

Scouts Inc decided to take their decisive man power and knowledge and apply it towards a good cause: subjectively ranking all twelve playoff coaches.

Just because that wasn't nearly enough, no, they had to drop this gem:

4. Washington Redskins
Joe Gibbs is one of the best coaches of all time and will eventually be in the Hall of Fame

One problem. Joe Gibbs has been in the Hall of Fame. For eleven years.