So I had Sportscenter on today, and Merrill Hoge was talking about the Broncos-Chargers game this weekend. So the question was, whether or not he liked the gutsy call by Shanahan to go for two at the end of overtime.
Naturally, I expected him to say that he liked it. For one thing, every ESPN commentator that has said anything about it has been singing Shanahan's praises relentlessly, and for another it worked...so of course they take his side.
Hoge decides to take that plan a few steps further, or perhaps several light-years further. Merril Hoge steps up on the soap box and suggests that field goals and extra points be banned entirely during the last 5 minutes of a football game. Go for it on fourth down, even if it's 4th and goal from the 33. Go for two. As he said, "we're not going to do anything to overtime, so let's just keep games from going in to overtime".
Other things that would keep games from going into overtime: if a game ends in a tie, have the coaches whip it out and see who is bigger; if a home team can't win in regulation, the away team should be declared the winner; have Ed Hochuli arm wrestle the coaches, and the coach with less bone and ligament damage be declared the winner. All of those would make more sense than making a team go for it on 4th and goal from the 33 with 10 seconds left, trailing by 3 points. Not to mention: five minutes? How did Hoge come up with that? So if a game is tied 28-28 at the end of the first quarter and there is no further scoring in regulation, then overtime is ok but we can't have a game become tied in the last five minutes?
Oh, and just for the sake of argument, how is taking the strategy out of the coaches hands more exciting than sudden death overtime? Granted there are A LOT of problems with sudden death overtime, but remember this is the instituion that brought us the back-to-back walk-off interception returns for touchdowns by Mike Brown. Honestly, stupid shit like this is why people hated the XFL.
Showing posts with label crazy old men. Show all posts
Showing posts with label crazy old men. Show all posts
Monday, September 15, 2008
Saturday, July 12, 2008
A Match for the Ages
Okay, we get it guys. People want the NFL to be a 12 month deal. They want year round NFL coverage ranging from the strategy behind the X's and O's to an intrusive view of the players' lives. I get that.
And still, this is not necessary.
As a blogger, I think this could be a pretty cool idea for a feature length article: take all the base salaries in the NFL, and make a 53 man roster out of the players around their league: keeping the total payroll under 116 million, which is the NFL salary cap.
It's not necessary to have this done twice.
It's really, really dumb to have the two "teams" "play".
To have the "winner" of the game decided by Dr. Z, it just defies words.
"I know you like the Lombardies and you're gonna have to lay 12½."
To recap:
1. Michael Lombardi and Bucky Brooks now are in charge of make believe teams assembled under a ficticious 116 dollar cap.
2. The teams will clash in "Dream Game 2008"
3. The line on said game is 12.5
Now, Dr. Z gives us a horrifically scary play by play recap of the game.
Alright, let's recap:
1. The "Lombardi's" win 34-20
2. Those who took the Lombardi's and the points just beat the spread
3. Dr. Z lost against the spread -- on a game that was played inside his own head
Finally, since this post is in desperate need of common sense, I give you Ross Tucker, who apparently does have the mental capacity to put the basic point of this exercise into focus...the point that all 4 of the prior writers totally missed:
Just remember: Michael Lombardi and Bucky Brooks actually worked on the side of football that is responsible for these decisions. Lombardi is in part responsible for the mess that is the Oakland Raiders today. Tucker, obviously, was a player. Which of course, proves that the concept of value is hardly rocket science. It's simply the most important concept in the game, and one that most execs don't quite understand as well as they should.
And still, this is not necessary.
As a blogger, I think this could be a pretty cool idea for a feature length article: take all the base salaries in the NFL, and make a 53 man roster out of the players around their league: keeping the total payroll under 116 million, which is the NFL salary cap.
It's not necessary to have this done twice.
It's really, really dumb to have the two "teams" "play".
To have the "winner" of the game decided by Dr. Z, it just defies words.
"I know you like the Lombardies and you're gonna have to lay 12½."
To recap:
1. Michael Lombardi and Bucky Brooks now are in charge of make believe teams assembled under a ficticious 116 dollar cap.
2. The teams will clash in "Dream Game 2008"
3. The line on said game is 12.5
Now, Dr. Z gives us a horrifically scary play by play recap of the game.
Seven minutes left. Brady goes to work. The Brooksies have dressed only six D-linemen and that's their undoing. They're exhausted. The rotation is killing them. The rush has died. Brady works them over with his mini-backs, Maurice Jones-Drew and Ahmad Bradshaw. With three minutes to go, he runs Jones-Drew on a sucker-trap for six points. The Brooksies get the ball at midfield, after a nifty return by Devin Hester. Will this be an overtime contest, the first one in a title game since Colts-Giants?
But the numbers game kills Brees, too. The Lombardies have loaded their lineup with D-linemen, nine, count'em, nine! On third-and-long, the well-rested pair of wingmen, Dwight Freeney and Justin Tuck, get him in a squeeze and knock the ball loose. The Lombardies only have to run the clock now, but on third and long they run a draw play, over Shaun Rogers, who is too tired to get out of his stance, and little Maurice breaks it for 40 yards and the last score of the game, which gives the Lombardies a 34-20 victory. Dr. Z's bet, taking the 12½, sinks beneath the waves with all hands singing Nearer My God To Thee.
Alright, let's recap:
1. The "Lombardi's" win 34-20
2. Those who took the Lombardi's and the points just beat the spread
3. Dr. Z lost against the spread -- on a game that was played inside his own head
Finally, since this post is in desperate need of common sense, I give you Ross Tucker, who apparently does have the mental capacity to put the basic point of this exercise into focus...the point that all 4 of the prior writers totally missed:
The key is to attempt to compile all of the young players around the league drafted after the first round that have already proven themselves to be quality NFL players but have not yet received their second contracts. That is where all of the value is, both in the real NFL and in the Salary Cap Roster Challenge. Unlike the NFL, where you have to draft well in order to create that value, the Salary Cap Roster Challenge allows the combatants to selectively scour the league and scoop up all of the young players that have clearly outplayed their rookie contracts, thereby creating an enormously attractive value proposition for both their actual franchises and their virtual Roster Challenge teams.
Players that produce at a high level for a relatively paltry sum include the Saints' Marques Colston and Jahri Evans, the Giants' Ahmad Bradshaw and Kevin Boss and the Packers' Ryan Grant, Greg Jennings and James Jones, just to name a few. It also would have been easy to put a solid line together with the likes of the Bucs' Jeremy Trueblood and Aaron Sears. And there's no doubt I would have fought tooth and nail to get Devin Hester on my team -- $795,000 for a game-changer is a no-brainer.
Just remember: Michael Lombardi and Bucky Brooks actually worked on the side of football that is responsible for these decisions. Lombardi is in part responsible for the mess that is the Oakland Raiders today. Tucker, obviously, was a player. Which of course, proves that the concept of value is hardly rocket science. It's simply the most important concept in the game, and one that most execs don't quite understand as well as they should.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Dr. Z Effectively Ends Vikings' Title Hopes
By picking them to win it all.
Last year, I locked in my Super Bowl pick early and felt very good about the choice. For once, I wasn't trying to do a roster breakdown or getting myself all tied up in strengths and weaknesses. I was looking for a team with a chip on its shoulder, one that would be coming into the season with something to prove, a hungry team, nasty, etc.
Yeah, I mean, when any sportswriter is fatigued from a long and tiring day of careful analysis and number crunching...I suppose the next step is to just make up a bunch of intangibles as a defense for picking
The Saints were my Super Bowl winner.
(the Saints) to win the Super Bowl.
Anyway, the Saints didn't really look any worse at the end of the season than they did when Dr. Z picked them. The offense, passing offense at least, really didn't go anywhere from the prior year. Per DVOA, the Saints had the very worst pass D in the NFL last season. I don't think they were expected to be that bad, but they were 22nd against the pass in 2006, so one might assume that their 11 win season was sort of a fluke.
Anyway 7-9 wasn't a particularly poor season for them. They were just a really weak Super Bowl pick.
So why do I get this real hunch about [the Vikings]? OK, yeah, right now they're my choice for the winner of Supe (sic) XXIII. And here's why:
Let's get down to basics. Run the ball. Stop the run. Best in the league at both last year. I can't help it -- I'm hooked on the fundamentals. Their middle triangle of tackles Kevin and Pat Williams, backed up by E.J. Henderson, is classic, and now there's a serious element added to that mix.
DVOA doesn't actually have the Vikings the best at either, but I think I can ignore this point for now. They had Y/C numbers in the 3-4 range on defense, and in the 5-6 range on offense: which are both phenomenal. They were the first team in NFL history to finish with a greater than 2.8 yard difference between rushing yards for and against per play. Very good.
Of course, there are two major problems with this argument:
1) Assumption that trends will carry over from one year to the next. Sure the personnel is much of the same. But ESPECIALLY in the case of Pat Williams (dude's 36!), it's not smart to assume that career high performance is repeatable. And with Adrian Peterson's rookie year: the smart money is on his second season being not as good. Tremendous talent, but if he only averages 4.8 (only?) YPC, does this SB pick look smart then? Also:
2) Last year with elite rushing and rush stopping units (that really have zero room for improvement), the Vikings won (only!) 8 games and posted a 4.9% total DVOA, losing a must win game at home to a superior Redskin team in Week 16.
So yes, Dr. Z is predicting that 1) The Vikings will sustain their run production, and 2) somehow, they will win more games.
Of course, part of that somehow could be:
A trade with the Chiefs brought them defensive end Jared Allen in April. He brings with him the 2007 NFL sack title, plus a two-game DUI suspension at the beginning of the year. A gamble? Childress says no. Allen says he's on the wagon.
...
It's almost a miracle to get a guy like that in a trade. Sack specialists are like diamonds, and Allen's a young one -- only 26 years old! And he's not one of those wild-angle loopers who leaves a couple of acres inside for the runners. He's a technician who honors the down home of the game.
What the fuck is the "down home of the game"?!
I honestly think that Jared Allen is one of the five best defensive players in the game. There is no doubt in my mind that the 2008 Vikings are a better defensive team with Jared Allen than without him. He's probably worth every penny he got. And the Vikings do need a pass rush.
"Why," I was asked, "did Allen's production usually fall off in the second half?" And my answer was because he was on the field too much. The way the game is now, no defensive lineman, especially an edge rusher with a high motor, can do it without relief. And the Chiefs kept Allen on the field.
Allen's production really didn't fall off in the second half. Sure, a majority of his sacks came in the first half of ball games, but the Chiefs ranked 3rd (read: Third) in adjusted sack rate last year, so that 2nd half bs was probably just a sample size issue.
Anyway, I'm helping you make your argument, which isn't my job here.
Pass rush begets pass defense, which begets better statistics than the Vikings had last year, one of their big failings. They finished last in yards allowed. Where's the fix there? Madieu Williams, an active free safety for the Bengals last year. Charlie Gordon, a good, quick, free-agent cornerback.
I'll accept Williams being a decent addition, he's younger than the departed Dwight Smith -- but probably not any better.
Here's Charlie Gordon's PFR page. Let me know if you see anything there that screams Super Bowl caliber pass defense.
...
...
Okay, then. Moving on.
And I know where we're headed. Tarvaris Jackson, QB. Just 25 years old. Fine athlete, terrific scrambler, able to make big plays, but so far in his two years in the league, not enough of them. Sixth from the bottom among the ranked passers last year. When does it happen? Third year? Fourth? Not at all?
America voted: and they think it's...Not at all!
"(says Vikings coach Brad Childress) Besides the production, there's something to walking into the building every day and being the man. I mean every day. Tavaris is pretty good with that."
Tavaris Jackson, 2007
Comp %: 58.2%
QB Rating: 70.8
DVOA: -12.4%
the "man" efficency: 101.9
"I told him that when those legs go, you're going to have to learn to rely on other things," the coach says. "You've got to evolve. It's like a wounded animal. All the other senses are heightened. And he went out and had some of his most accurate games, passing the ball.
For 3 weeks (12-14), Jackson did an impressive impersonation of an NFL QB.
The next two weeks: 1 TD, 5 INTs.
Money.
(Childress, still) "When I got the job here, well, in my wildest dreams I didn't think I was going to have to get rid of a franchise quarterback. But after three weeks in the spring, it was just obvious that it wasn't going to work, with Daunte Culpepper. So I replaced him, and everybody pilloried us.
"Daunte was a guy who always used his legs. He wasn't an anticipatory thrower. He had to see the whites of their eyes. And once he got hurt, well, coming back from the injury, he couldn't play that way."
Per Wikipedia: "The pillory was a device used in punishment by public humiliation and often additional, sometimes lethal, physical abuse."
Given the circumstances: Justified.
(Again, Childress)"As a franchise quarterback, there's the matter of the work ethic, putting in your hours," Childress says. "Tarvaris knows that, how important it is that people see you working when they come in. Is he in the right place for a guy evolving? Yeah, I'm convinced he's got what it takes.
Except that
"We just have to see how he does on the field."
I suppose the next step is to just make up a bunch of intangibles as a defense for picking (the Vikings) to win the Super Bowl.
(Zimmerman here) So en fin, do I like the Vikings to go all the way? Well, yeah, why not? A feeling of destiny, that's what I sense about Brad Childress and his baby quarterback.
Last year, I locked in my Super Bowl pick early and felt very good about the choice. For once, I wasn't trying to do a roster breakdown or getting myself all tied up in strengths and weaknesses. I was looking for a team with a chip on its shoulder, one that would be coming into the season with something to prove, a hungry team, nasty, etc.
Yeah, I mean, when any sportswriter is fatigued from a long and tiring day of careful analysis and number crunching...I suppose the next step is to just make up a bunch of intangibles as a defense for picking
The Saints were my Super Bowl winner.
(the Saints) to win the Super Bowl.
Anyway, the Saints didn't really look any worse at the end of the season than they did when Dr. Z picked them. The offense, passing offense at least, really didn't go anywhere from the prior year. Per DVOA, the Saints had the very worst pass D in the NFL last season. I don't think they were expected to be that bad, but they were 22nd against the pass in 2006, so one might assume that their 11 win season was sort of a fluke.
Anyway 7-9 wasn't a particularly poor season for them. They were just a really weak Super Bowl pick.
So why do I get this real hunch about [the Vikings]? OK, yeah, right now they're my choice for the winner of Supe (sic) XXIII. And here's why:
Let's get down to basics. Run the ball. Stop the run. Best in the league at both last year. I can't help it -- I'm hooked on the fundamentals. Their middle triangle of tackles Kevin and Pat Williams, backed up by E.J. Henderson, is classic, and now there's a serious element added to that mix.
DVOA doesn't actually have the Vikings the best at either, but I think I can ignore this point for now. They had Y/C numbers in the 3-4 range on defense, and in the 5-6 range on offense: which are both phenomenal. They were the first team in NFL history to finish with a greater than 2.8 yard difference between rushing yards for and against per play. Very good.
Of course, there are two major problems with this argument:
1) Assumption that trends will carry over from one year to the next. Sure the personnel is much of the same. But ESPECIALLY in the case of Pat Williams (dude's 36!), it's not smart to assume that career high performance is repeatable. And with Adrian Peterson's rookie year: the smart money is on his second season being not as good. Tremendous talent, but if he only averages 4.8 (only?) YPC, does this SB pick look smart then? Also:
2) Last year with elite rushing and rush stopping units (that really have zero room for improvement), the Vikings won (only!) 8 games and posted a 4.9% total DVOA, losing a must win game at home to a superior Redskin team in Week 16.
So yes, Dr. Z is predicting that 1) The Vikings will sustain their run production, and 2) somehow, they will win more games.
Of course, part of that somehow could be:
A trade with the Chiefs brought them defensive end Jared Allen in April. He brings with him the 2007 NFL sack title, plus a two-game DUI suspension at the beginning of the year. A gamble? Childress says no. Allen says he's on the wagon.
...
It's almost a miracle to get a guy like that in a trade. Sack specialists are like diamonds, and Allen's a young one -- only 26 years old! And he's not one of those wild-angle loopers who leaves a couple of acres inside for the runners. He's a technician who honors the down home of the game.
What the fuck is the "down home of the game"?!
I honestly think that Jared Allen is one of the five best defensive players in the game. There is no doubt in my mind that the 2008 Vikings are a better defensive team with Jared Allen than without him. He's probably worth every penny he got. And the Vikings do need a pass rush.
"Why," I was asked, "did Allen's production usually fall off in the second half?" And my answer was because he was on the field too much. The way the game is now, no defensive lineman, especially an edge rusher with a high motor, can do it without relief. And the Chiefs kept Allen on the field.
Allen's production really didn't fall off in the second half. Sure, a majority of his sacks came in the first half of ball games, but the Chiefs ranked 3rd (read: Third) in adjusted sack rate last year, so that 2nd half bs was probably just a sample size issue.
Anyway, I'm helping you make your argument, which isn't my job here.
Pass rush begets pass defense, which begets better statistics than the Vikings had last year, one of their big failings. They finished last in yards allowed. Where's the fix there? Madieu Williams, an active free safety for the Bengals last year. Charlie Gordon, a good, quick, free-agent cornerback.
I'll accept Williams being a decent addition, he's younger than the departed Dwight Smith -- but probably not any better.
Here's Charlie Gordon's PFR page. Let me know if you see anything there that screams Super Bowl caliber pass defense.
...
...
Okay, then. Moving on.
And I know where we're headed. Tarvaris Jackson, QB. Just 25 years old. Fine athlete, terrific scrambler, able to make big plays, but so far in his two years in the league, not enough of them. Sixth from the bottom among the ranked passers last year. When does it happen? Third year? Fourth? Not at all?
America voted: and they think it's...Not at all!
"(says Vikings coach Brad Childress) Besides the production, there's something to walking into the building every day and being the man. I mean every day. Tavaris is pretty good with that."
Tavaris Jackson, 2007
Comp %: 58.2%
QB Rating: 70.8
DVOA: -12.4%
the "man" efficency: 101.9
"I told him that when those legs go, you're going to have to learn to rely on other things," the coach says. "You've got to evolve. It's like a wounded animal. All the other senses are heightened. And he went out and had some of his most accurate games, passing the ball.
For 3 weeks (12-14), Jackson did an impressive impersonation of an NFL QB.
The next two weeks: 1 TD, 5 INTs.
Money.
(Childress, still) "When I got the job here, well, in my wildest dreams I didn't think I was going to have to get rid of a franchise quarterback. But after three weeks in the spring, it was just obvious that it wasn't going to work, with Daunte Culpepper. So I replaced him, and everybody pilloried us.
"Daunte was a guy who always used his legs. He wasn't an anticipatory thrower. He had to see the whites of their eyes. And once he got hurt, well, coming back from the injury, he couldn't play that way."
Per Wikipedia: "The pillory was a device used in punishment by public humiliation and often additional, sometimes lethal, physical abuse."
Given the circumstances: Justified.
(Again, Childress)"As a franchise quarterback, there's the matter of the work ethic, putting in your hours," Childress says. "Tarvaris knows that, how important it is that people see you working when they come in. Is he in the right place for a guy evolving? Yeah, I'm convinced he's got what it takes.
Except that
"We just have to see how he does on the field."
I suppose the next step is to just make up a bunch of intangibles as a defense for picking (the Vikings) to win the Super Bowl.
(Zimmerman here) So en fin, do I like the Vikings to go all the way? Well, yeah, why not? A feeling of destiny, that's what I sense about Brad Childress and his baby quarterback.
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Made
This might sound like splitting hairs, but it epitomizes a really disturbing trend in football analysis, so I have to post it. Phil Simms is certainly not the only guilty party, but he is the funniest:
Anyway, if you enjoy hating dickish place kickers as much as I do, or if you're looking for some sort of reason to be happy about the Pats going undefeated, you'll love this post over at KissingSuzyKolber. You might also want to check and see if that video of Bill Gramatica injuring himself celebrating a field goal is still on YouTube. That stuff's hilarious.
"Troy Smith is in his second start today, and did really well last week, but he's gotta learn to make them....make you....beat them deep."Might not be an exact quote. Phil Simms made me make him make me make myself have trouble remembering who made who make what by making this.
Anyway, if you enjoy hating dickish place kickers as much as I do, or if you're looking for some sort of reason to be happy about the Pats going undefeated, you'll love this post over at KissingSuzyKolber. You might also want to check and see if that video of Bill Gramatica injuring himself celebrating a field goal is still on YouTube. That stuff's hilarious.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Cloud over Baltimore just self-satisfaction
The dense, impenetrable cloud that hung over Baltimore this Monday night has dissipated. The sound of gun shots and foul stench remains, but locals report they are "used to it".
The Ravens gave the Patriots all....well, most....that they could handle, in a stadium that was filled to the brim, and, amazingly, a couple of fans were able to squeeze in between the collective egos of Bill Belichek, Brian Billick, and Don Shula.
The Patriots remained undefeated, leading Shula to trade in the champagne for enormous quantities of Nutrasystem low-carb whiskey. Brian Billick was seen kissing...his job good-bye.
The Ravens gave the Patriots all....well, most....that they could handle, in a stadium that was filled to the brim, and, amazingly, a couple of fans were able to squeeze in between the collective egos of Bill Belichek, Brian Billick, and Don Shula.
The Patriots remained undefeated, leading Shula to trade in the champagne for enormous quantities of Nutrasystem low-carb whiskey. Brian Billick was seen kissing...his job good-bye.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
This just in, the 72 Dolphins are all assholes
Mercury Morris, running back and douchebag extradinaire spoke out this week, explaining that the Patriots are nowhere near accomplishing the great achievement of his 72 Dolphins. The always modest Morris pointed out that no one has surpassed their magnificence yet, and that the Patriots have 10 more games to go (though this is a matter of opinion, since the Dolphins of course played fewer games).
Here are some totally unrelated facts:
Just for comparison, and as a contingency in case the Pats don't make it:
Here are some totally unrelated facts:
- 72 Dolphins' opponent winning% .396
- 72 Dolphins' points scored-points allowed 14 game season : 214
- 2007 Patriots points scored-points allowed 9 games in: 208
Just for comparison, and as a contingency in case the Pats don't make it:
- 85 Bears' opponent winning% .500
- 85 Bears' points scored - points allowed (including fluky Miami loss) ADJUSTED TO 14 GAME SEASON: 225.75
(originally 258)
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Tonight we're gonna Party like it's 1695!
Remember when Dr. Z was cool? I don't.
We have fun on this blog with Dr. Z's works. In fairness to him, he's not really a serious journalist. He's reached the point where you either accept his rankings as absolute truth no questions asked, or you realize that they are complete baloney and you are better off taking teams out of a hat and listing them as the pills fly.
Senile or not, there is absolutely no excuse for this piece of crap. I wish not to discuss the nuiances of a football game with anyone who can't see from this piece that Dr. Z has simply lost his mind.
He basically tries to denounce passer rating as a stat as utter garbage.
[I]t's a prehistoric monster that no one understands, an illogical piece of antiquity that influences so much of the game when it shouldn't. It affects what is written, what is discussed, what becomes the basis, in some cases, of salary structure and bonuses for players and coordinators.
Okay. Settle down kiddos and take a deep long breath. If you are reading this blog, you are certainly not a member of the sample universe that Dr. Z is addressing. Therefore, you are a no one to him. Because let's face it, if you are anyone, you aren't allowed to understand passer rating. Anyway, for those of you who need a refresher course: here's a basic overview of how passer rating is calculated.
Passer rating is a cumulative statistic that is split equally into 4 parts: Int/Att, TD/Att, Comp/Att, Yards/Att. Scores can range anywhere from 0.0-158.6 Each component of the stat will range between 0.0-39.7. The 4 components are added together and gives you a cumulative number. League average tends to hover around 78.0 depending on the year.
Passer rating has some major flaws. First of all, remember that the stat represents all 4 categories as equal components of QB performance. Yards/Attempt is generally seen as the most important stat, and should rank more than one quarter of the total output in a perfect system. Combined, TDs and INTs make up half the rating, but these number can skew the total BAD especially in a small sample. Additionally, Completion percentage already correlates somewhat to TDs AND INTs based on attempts, so its essentially stating the same thing 3 different ways.
A better formula would look something like this:
(Quantity INT/ATT) * .05 + (Quantity comp/att) * .5 + (Quantity Yards/Att) * .45
Where the completion percentage makes up half the total and the yards per attempt makes up 45%, leaving a measly 5% for interceptions per attempt to account for the select QBs (Favre) who always exceed their INT projection based on their completion percentage.
Here's the point. QB Rating is a main stream stat, and it gets it right in a lot of ways because of its use of the ever so important rate stats.
Now with that out of the way, back to Dr. Z totally humiliating himself.
Steve Young, who has the highest career passer rating in history, admits that he's "not quite sure how the system works."
Steve Young is an idiot. Maybe the greatest QB ever, but an idiot nevertheless. I wouldn't expect anything different, would you?
Charley Casserly, who as Redskins general manager was quite aware that some clauses were built into contracts that reflected the rating points, says, "No, I couldn't tell you exactly how they determine the ratings."
Charlie Casserly drafted both Heath Shuler and David Carr in the top 5 picks of their respective drafts.
Bill Parcells, whose 11-point dictum to quarterbacks came from years of study of the position, says, "I don't know how they arrive at their ratings and I don't care. I don't pay any attention to them. I have my own system for evaluating quarterbacks."
The key here is that he does in fact have his own system for evaluation. Dr. Z clearly does not, but curiously ignored that part of Parcells' quote. As stated above, QB Rating is hardly the be all end all, but in a large sample, you won't stray too far from reality if you use it.
Average grades were in the 60s and 70s. En masse, NFL passers in 1972 completed 51.7 percent of their heaves. A mark like that would earn a player a grade of 72.3. Average, in other words. Interception percentage, or number of interceptions per 100 passes thrown, was 5.3, league-wide. A grade of 70. Touchdowns per pass attempts averaged out to 4.5, a grade of 60, and yards per pass attempt came out to 6.82, which got a mark of 63.7.
Put all those figures together and you've got a number of 66.5 for a dead average player, hitting the norm in each category. Higher achievements, of course, would bring higher grades.
Okay. This is getting weird.
After spending the entire first page of his article criticizing a system that "no one understands", Dr. Z goes on to show a pretty solid understanding of the system as it applies to stats in the 60s and 70s. One can only wonder where he's going with this.
Now here's the snapper. Achievements have gone way above the old standards, but Elias has maintained that same system for 35 years, with the same benchmarks and the same schedule of rewards. The passing game has changed dramatically, but [The] Elias [Sports Bureau] plods on, stuck in its standards of 1973, when its system came in.
That's it folks. Dr. Z. thinks QB rating is a useless stat, because it's old and hasn't changed in thirty five years. That's...blatent hypocrisy.
But that's not all, Dr. Z now goes on the offensive.
I said that their practice of including quarterback kneels at the end of the game in the rushing stats was wrong and misleading. It penalized the good teams, which won, therefore had QB kneels. It could knock a team's rushing stats down from 4.0 to 3.7 by artificial means. Just have an asterisk designation ... "Three kneels for minus three yards, not to be included in the official statistics."This of course is a good point, but sample size more than accounts for this. Not that I would expect Dr. Z to know anything about sample size, it's not like that concept has changed in the last 35 years, so it must be garbage.
The small sample stats would be a lot more accurate if kneels weren't included in the stats, but it really is much ado about nothing.
I screamed about spikes being scored as incompletions thereby penalizing the QBs from bad teams, which always were catching up, hence spiking the ball. Why should they influence a passer's accuracy?
Same deal here. Dr. Z is right that the short term stats would be more representitive of the job a guy did if spikes didn't count as incompletions, but like the above example:
1) Independant Organizations such as Football Outsiders have already created stats (See: DVOA) that measure more accurately than the basic stats.
2) Sample size all but eliminates rare plays such as spikes and kneels.
In Dr. Z's defense, his beef seems to be against the Elias Sports Bureau, but that doesn't give him a right to project his beef to any and all objective evidence.
As of this week, all the ranked quarterbacks in the league average 63.3 percent completions. In 1972, the year that keyed the standards put in, that was a stunning statistic. Only one passer even topped 60 percent, Norm Snead of the Giants at 60.3. A mark of 63.8 percent would have gotten you a rating in that category of 110.9, a Pro Bowl number. Guess what? It still does today. In other words, average equals excellent.
Okay. This is where Dr. Z culminates his pretty solid argument by drawing one of the most asinine conclusions in the history of logic. Outside of his complete and utter ignorance of era adjustments, he makes the blanket assumption that all "stat geeks" feel that there is a hard number that QBs must stay above to reach certain levels of achievement. This is every bit as stupid as arguing that a RB who gains 99 yards in a game had a comparable game to a RB that gains 101 yards under similar conditions, and then bitching out the guy standing next to him under the assumption that he might disagree with this logic.
Obviously a QB rating of 90 was more impressive in 1958 than it is now. Any stat relies on realistic interpretation to give it value.
And here's where the shit hits the fan:
Chad Pennington: 111.2
Jeff Garcia: 110.7
Ben Roethlisberger: 108.0
Byron Leftwich: 97.2
Sage Rosenfels: 91.4
Donovan McNabb: 91.1
In each case, the passer with those gaudy numbers lost ... repeat: lost the game. And yet many people rely on them to judge the quarterbacks. A safety-first mentality has been created. Throw the 8-yard checkdown on third-and-12; it'll work wonders for the rating chart. Avoid interceptions at all cost, don't be bold, take care. Remember, your contract is tied to it.
I would be willing to bet Dr. Z's house and his wife that QB Rating correlates STRONGLY to winning percentage. Thanks for giving us a sample of one week and trying to make a conclusive argument though.
For the record: 8 yards on 3-12 is significantly better than an interception, and measurably better than an incompletion. If it was simple to convert on third and long, this discussion wouldn't be necessary.
Also, avoiding interceptions=generally a good thing.
Anyway, that's whats wrong with the system, per Dr. Z. He doesn't understand it, and you nobodies who happen to understand it...how can you sleep at night!
We have fun on this blog with Dr. Z's works. In fairness to him, he's not really a serious journalist. He's reached the point where you either accept his rankings as absolute truth no questions asked, or you realize that they are complete baloney and you are better off taking teams out of a hat and listing them as the pills fly.
Senile or not, there is absolutely no excuse for this piece of crap. I wish not to discuss the nuiances of a football game with anyone who can't see from this piece that Dr. Z has simply lost his mind.
He basically tries to denounce passer rating as a stat as utter garbage.
[I]t's a prehistoric monster that no one understands, an illogical piece of antiquity that influences so much of the game when it shouldn't. It affects what is written, what is discussed, what becomes the basis, in some cases, of salary structure and bonuses for players and coordinators.
Okay. Settle down kiddos and take a deep long breath. If you are reading this blog, you are certainly not a member of the sample universe that Dr. Z is addressing. Therefore, you are a no one to him. Because let's face it, if you are anyone, you aren't allowed to understand passer rating. Anyway, for those of you who need a refresher course: here's a basic overview of how passer rating is calculated.
Passer rating is a cumulative statistic that is split equally into 4 parts: Int/Att, TD/Att, Comp/Att, Yards/Att. Scores can range anywhere from 0.0-158.6 Each component of the stat will range between 0.0-39.7. The 4 components are added together and gives you a cumulative number. League average tends to hover around 78.0 depending on the year.
Passer rating has some major flaws. First of all, remember that the stat represents all 4 categories as equal components of QB performance. Yards/Attempt is generally seen as the most important stat, and should rank more than one quarter of the total output in a perfect system. Combined, TDs and INTs make up half the rating, but these number can skew the total BAD especially in a small sample. Additionally, Completion percentage already correlates somewhat to TDs AND INTs based on attempts, so its essentially stating the same thing 3 different ways.
A better formula would look something like this:
(Quantity INT/ATT) * .05 + (Quantity comp/att) * .5 + (Quantity Yards/Att) * .45
Where the completion percentage makes up half the total and the yards per attempt makes up 45%, leaving a measly 5% for interceptions per attempt to account for the select QBs (Favre) who always exceed their INT projection based on their completion percentage.
Here's the point. QB Rating is a main stream stat, and it gets it right in a lot of ways because of its use of the ever so important rate stats.
Now with that out of the way, back to Dr. Z totally humiliating himself.
Steve Young, who has the highest career passer rating in history, admits that he's "not quite sure how the system works."
Steve Young is an idiot. Maybe the greatest QB ever, but an idiot nevertheless. I wouldn't expect anything different, would you?
Charley Casserly, who as Redskins general manager was quite aware that some clauses were built into contracts that reflected the rating points, says, "No, I couldn't tell you exactly how they determine the ratings."
Charlie Casserly drafted both Heath Shuler and David Carr in the top 5 picks of their respective drafts.
Bill Parcells, whose 11-point dictum to quarterbacks came from years of study of the position, says, "I don't know how they arrive at their ratings and I don't care. I don't pay any attention to them. I have my own system for evaluating quarterbacks."
The key here is that he does in fact have his own system for evaluation. Dr. Z clearly does not, but curiously ignored that part of Parcells' quote. As stated above, QB Rating is hardly the be all end all, but in a large sample, you won't stray too far from reality if you use it.
Average grades were in the 60s and 70s. En masse, NFL passers in 1972 completed 51.7 percent of their heaves. A mark like that would earn a player a grade of 72.3. Average, in other words. Interception percentage, or number of interceptions per 100 passes thrown, was 5.3, league-wide. A grade of 70. Touchdowns per pass attempts averaged out to 4.5, a grade of 60, and yards per pass attempt came out to 6.82, which got a mark of 63.7.
Put all those figures together and you've got a number of 66.5 for a dead average player, hitting the norm in each category. Higher achievements, of course, would bring higher grades.
Okay. This is getting weird.
After spending the entire first page of his article criticizing a system that "no one understands", Dr. Z goes on to show a pretty solid understanding of the system as it applies to stats in the 60s and 70s. One can only wonder where he's going with this.
Now here's the snapper. Achievements have gone way above the old standards, but Elias has maintained that same system for 35 years, with the same benchmarks and the same schedule of rewards. The passing game has changed dramatically, but [The] Elias [Sports Bureau] plods on, stuck in its standards of 1973, when its system came in.
That's it folks. Dr. Z. thinks QB rating is a useless stat, because it's old and hasn't changed in thirty five years. That's...blatent hypocrisy.
But that's not all, Dr. Z now goes on the offensive.
I said that their practice of including quarterback kneels at the end of the game in the rushing stats was wrong and misleading. It penalized the good teams, which won, therefore had QB kneels. It could knock a team's rushing stats down from 4.0 to 3.7 by artificial means. Just have an asterisk designation ... "Three kneels for minus three yards, not to be included in the official statistics."This of course is a good point, but sample size more than accounts for this. Not that I would expect Dr. Z to know anything about sample size, it's not like that concept has changed in the last 35 years, so it must be garbage.
The small sample stats would be a lot more accurate if kneels weren't included in the stats, but it really is much ado about nothing.
I screamed about spikes being scored as incompletions thereby penalizing the QBs from bad teams, which always were catching up, hence spiking the ball. Why should they influence a passer's accuracy?
Same deal here. Dr. Z is right that the short term stats would be more representitive of the job a guy did if spikes didn't count as incompletions, but like the above example:
1) Independant Organizations such as Football Outsiders have already created stats (See: DVOA) that measure more accurately than the basic stats.
2) Sample size all but eliminates rare plays such as spikes and kneels.
In Dr. Z's defense, his beef seems to be against the Elias Sports Bureau, but that doesn't give him a right to project his beef to any and all objective evidence.
As of this week, all the ranked quarterbacks in the league average 63.3 percent completions. In 1972, the year that keyed the standards put in, that was a stunning statistic. Only one passer even topped 60 percent, Norm Snead of the Giants at 60.3. A mark of 63.8 percent would have gotten you a rating in that category of 110.9, a Pro Bowl number. Guess what? It still does today. In other words, average equals excellent.
Okay. This is where Dr. Z culminates his pretty solid argument by drawing one of the most asinine conclusions in the history of logic. Outside of his complete and utter ignorance of era adjustments, he makes the blanket assumption that all "stat geeks" feel that there is a hard number that QBs must stay above to reach certain levels of achievement. This is every bit as stupid as arguing that a RB who gains 99 yards in a game had a comparable game to a RB that gains 101 yards under similar conditions, and then bitching out the guy standing next to him under the assumption that he might disagree with this logic.
Obviously a QB rating of 90 was more impressive in 1958 than it is now. Any stat relies on realistic interpretation to give it value.
And here's where the shit hits the fan:
Chad Pennington: 111.2
Jeff Garcia: 110.7
Ben Roethlisberger: 108.0
Byron Leftwich: 97.2
Sage Rosenfels: 91.4
Donovan McNabb: 91.1
In each case, the passer with those gaudy numbers lost ... repeat: lost the game. And yet many people rely on them to judge the quarterbacks. A safety-first mentality has been created. Throw the 8-yard checkdown on third-and-12; it'll work wonders for the rating chart. Avoid interceptions at all cost, don't be bold, take care. Remember, your contract is tied to it.
I would be willing to bet Dr. Z's house and his wife that QB Rating correlates STRONGLY to winning percentage. Thanks for giving us a sample of one week and trying to make a conclusive argument though.
For the record: 8 yards on 3-12 is significantly better than an interception, and measurably better than an incompletion. If it was simple to convert on third and long, this discussion wouldn't be necessary.
Also, avoiding interceptions=generally a good thing.
Anyway, that's whats wrong with the system, per Dr. Z. He doesn't understand it, and you nobodies who happen to understand it...how can you sleep at night!
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Where exactly is the "Hill" again?
Per Len Pasquarelli:
Arguably the best free-agent quarterback still available is Drew Bledsoe, who has fielded more than a few phone calls but remains steadfast in insisting he is retired. Jake Plummer is sitting at home in Idaho, but the Bucs still own his rights and have filed a grievance against him for retiring rather than reporting to camp. Aaron Brooks probably is the next most-accomplished free agent.
"And after that," noted one pro personnel director, whose team has not yet suffered a problem at quarterback, "it really goes downhill."
The best three quarterbacks that a "pro personnel director" could come up with are Bledsoe, Plummer, and Brooks?
I guess Vinny Testaverde was already...oh right.
Arguably the best free-agent quarterback still available is Drew Bledsoe, who has fielded more than a few phone calls but remains steadfast in insisting he is retired. Jake Plummer is sitting at home in Idaho, but the Bucs still own his rights and have filed a grievance against him for retiring rather than reporting to camp. Aaron Brooks probably is the next most-accomplished free agent.
"And after that," noted one pro personnel director, whose team has not yet suffered a problem at quarterback, "it really goes downhill."
The best three quarterbacks that a "pro personnel director" could come up with are Bledsoe, Plummer, and Brooks?
I guess Vinny Testaverde was already...oh right.
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Turn Off ESPN presents an honest evaluation of JaMarcus Russell!
April Fools!!
Tom Martinez knows better. He knows that an arm does not make a quarterback. He knows that Tom Brady, his most famous protégé, won three Super Bowls because he respects the finer points of the job. And he knows that a quarterback should never, ever be asked to roll to one side of the field and then throw to the other. It's inefficient, mechanically unsound, such a scandalous misuse of momentum that a 10th-grade physics student would flag the play.
Yes, this is all quite accurate.
But Martinez couldn't help himself. JaMarcus Russell's arm is that seductive.
Once again, JaMarcus Russell's arm inspires the ignorance of all general football laws. That is a really special arm that's about to lead him to a Grossman-esque career.
When it came time to create a list of plays for Russell to run in front of dozens of NFL scouts and executives last month, Martinez went with the taboo as their grand finale. Russell rolled right, and his receiver broke that way, too, before switching direction.
"JaMarcus threw it 70 yards and completed it," Martinez said. "It was unbelievable, unbelievable. You could hear this "Ahhhh" coming from all the NFL people."
Read that quote again. Now I want you to tell me that Tom Martinez is not just another fanboy.
He wore a mischievous grin when he described the play, still exhilarated that Russell could do something so wrong so right. In his 32 years as a coach at the College of San Mateo and endless summers tutoring quarterbacks at football camps, Martinez has worked with some of the biggest names in the business -- John Elway, future Heisman winner Gino Torretta, USC's Rob Johnson and Brady, who attended his first Martinez camp at age 13 and still calls on him for help with his mechanics. New Englanders view Martinez as something of a wizard.
Torretta and Johnson. If Russell could only be that good...
But the coach has never seen anyone quite like the 21-year-old favorite to become the No. 1 pick in this month's NFL draft or done anything like the prep work that he performed for Russell.
Remember when Kyle Boller took a knee on the 50 yard line and consistnetly threw balls though the uprights, wowing everyone there with his arm strength. I mean, it seemed at the time that taking a player based solely on physical skills was foolish. Then we saw it all play out for Kyle Boller. So what's going to be the excuse when Russell is predictably average. He was in Oakland? Wrong, wrong, wrong. Scouts have learned that it is foolish to project a QB to the NFL based on the variable of Arm Strength. Yet, they seem to be unable to control their hormones every time a guy like Russell roles around. Who's paying these guys. Quotes like these should be grounds for dismissal so you don't continue to make the same mistakes year after year.
At Athletes' Performance, a specialized training camp in Tempe, Ariz., Martinez joined a team grooming Russell to take his place atop the draft. The chief competition, Brady Quinn of Notre Dame, is more polished and experienced than Russell, with four years as a college starter as opposed to two, yet he showed up in Tempe for some buffing of his own.
YES!! YES!! Four years of college compared to two. THIS IS WHAT MATTERS. This is it. Build on this point. This is the only reason that Brady Quinn will be a better NFL QB then Jamarcus Russell. Gwen Knapp, please oh please don't let throw this point out here without comparing Russell to other first round picks who started less than 30 games in college, and Quinn to other guys who started 45 plus. Just do it, I beg you!
Russell's size makes him both alluring and unnerving, creating doubts about his agility. He can probably absorb a hit very well, but will he lumber around in the pocket, unable to keep up with the speed of the NFL game? At 6-foot-6, he looks more like a tight end than a quarterback, and he reportedly carried as much as 265 pounds when he led LSU past Quinn's Irish in the Sugar Bowl. His fitness advisers in Arizona peeled close to 10 pounds off him, revealing a sleeker model. Martinez immediately went to work on Russell's feet.
GAAHHHHHH!!! NOOOO. Ah, the AGONY!!
I hate bad sportswriting.
In fact, he wanted to put all of Russell's presumed weaknesses on display. Agents create scripts for these events, and they are usually written to obscure areas of doubt. Martinez reasoned that the scouts and coaches would eventually, in private workouts, ask Russell to perform drills that emphasized perceived shortcomings. He wanted the script to answer the big questions, to assure the scouts that Russell had nothing to hide.
Did Martinez find the Denver Broncos' defense and put them out there against the Oakland Raiders offense plus Russell at QB and let JaMarucus strut his stuff. If he didn't do this, I'm really not sure how much of his weaknesses were really on display. JaMarcus' weakness is his inexperience, just like any other QB who has ever come out early. By the time he gets to a point where he makes up the gap between himself and Quinn's college experience, he's probably already going to be a backup somewhere in this league. He's never going to catch Quinn in experience unless Quinn sustaines a multiple year injury.
When you really think about it, making a guy with 2 years of college experience your NFL Quarterback is really no different than a fortune 500 corporation giving a high ranking managerial job to a person who left school half way through his/her college degree to "go pro". I mean, it very well could work out for you. But you try to tell me that the same person would NOT be a more efficent worker if he/she stayed and finished his/her degree.
Now tell me that Russell will be better than Quinn.
By coming out early, Russell already put the sentence on his NFL Career. I'm guessing sometime in his first 4 seasons, he will post a respectable set of numbers, and a bunch of talking heads will talk about how JaMarcus Russell has "arrived". The next year those numbers will completely regress and the only person the mediots won't blame for the regression is Russell himself.
I guess it can be debated if Russell goes number one overall whether or not it was worth it to come out. On one hand, he could have been a bona fide stud QB had he stayed in college another year and produced. On the other, he likely would not be the No. 1 pick in a draft that includes Brian Brohm. Then again, he shouldn't be the No. 1 pick in a draft that involves Quinn, but Brohm could be even better than Quinn.
The Raiders, current owners of the top pick, recently invited Martinez for what was reported to be an interview to become the team's quarterbacks coach. Martinez read it more as "a chance to exchange information," and he filled them in on what he had learned about Russell.
If the Raiders took the opinion of a guy with a clear interest in the matter with any more than a grain of salt, there is no hope for them as an organzation.
Russell's soft-spoken personality? "He's very quiet, very respectful," Martinez said, "He doesn't say much, but he's always taking things in. You can see him sizing things up and figuring people out."
Russell's background? Martinez believes that any NFL executive who meets with Russell's relatives will gain confidence in the decision to draft him. "He has a very grounded family," Martinez said. "They're all squared away. They're not buying into the fanfare around this."
Now, Gwen Knapp, you've discarded all analysis to turn this into a puff piece. Congratulations.
The other information he would like to impart would apply to any 21-year-old. Russell needs stability, continuity on the coaching staff. Martinez once heard Jim Plunkett describe a harrowing period in his career when the quarterbacks coach changed four times in four years. He doesn't want one of the most prodigious talents the game has ever seen to be squandered.
Because Jim Plunkett's career ended just so horribly unfufilled.
Martinez has seen all of Russell's flaws up close, and he still finds himself amazed. He says that Russell, fulfilling a typical scout's request, can stand flat-footed at the goal line and, without moving his body for the necessary torque, throw a ball 77 yards downfield.
That's nothing. Did I tell you about the time that Kyle Boller threw a ball really far from his knees. Russell ain't got nothing on Boller.
He can also sit at the opponent's 40-yard line and throw a ball through the uprights of the goalpost. Cal's Kyle Boller once asserted that he could throw the same pass from the 50 while on his knees. But Russell does it on his backside, relying entirely on his arm. Martinez fondly calls this maneuver "the butt throw."
Shit. This is the most unbelieveable paragraph in professional sportswriting. You are comparing (correctly) JaMarcus Russell to Kyle Boller in a puff piece. DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW RETARDED THAT IS! How can you make this comparision and NOT REALIZE THAT KYLE BOLLER IS A HORRIBLE QUARTERBACK!!
Martinez is a technical wizard, so he probably shouldn't be so impressed. But he can't help himself. Two weeks as JaMarcus Russell's coach turned him into a fanboy.
Okay, so in reality the article says "fan", not "fanboy". I just thought it rolled off the tounge better this way.
Tom Martinez knows better. He knows that an arm does not make a quarterback. He knows that Tom Brady, his most famous protégé, won three Super Bowls because he respects the finer points of the job. And he knows that a quarterback should never, ever be asked to roll to one side of the field and then throw to the other. It's inefficient, mechanically unsound, such a scandalous misuse of momentum that a 10th-grade physics student would flag the play.
Yes, this is all quite accurate.
But Martinez couldn't help himself. JaMarcus Russell's arm is that seductive.
Once again, JaMarcus Russell's arm inspires the ignorance of all general football laws. That is a really special arm that's about to lead him to a Grossman-esque career.
When it came time to create a list of plays for Russell to run in front of dozens of NFL scouts and executives last month, Martinez went with the taboo as their grand finale. Russell rolled right, and his receiver broke that way, too, before switching direction.
"JaMarcus threw it 70 yards and completed it," Martinez said. "It was unbelievable, unbelievable. You could hear this "Ahhhh" coming from all the NFL people."
Read that quote again. Now I want you to tell me that Tom Martinez is not just another fanboy.
He wore a mischievous grin when he described the play, still exhilarated that Russell could do something so wrong so right. In his 32 years as a coach at the College of San Mateo and endless summers tutoring quarterbacks at football camps, Martinez has worked with some of the biggest names in the business -- John Elway, future Heisman winner Gino Torretta, USC's Rob Johnson and Brady, who attended his first Martinez camp at age 13 and still calls on him for help with his mechanics. New Englanders view Martinez as something of a wizard.
Torretta and Johnson. If Russell could only be that good...
But the coach has never seen anyone quite like the 21-year-old favorite to become the No. 1 pick in this month's NFL draft or done anything like the prep work that he performed for Russell.
Remember when Kyle Boller took a knee on the 50 yard line and consistnetly threw balls though the uprights, wowing everyone there with his arm strength. I mean, it seemed at the time that taking a player based solely on physical skills was foolish. Then we saw it all play out for Kyle Boller. So what's going to be the excuse when Russell is predictably average. He was in Oakland? Wrong, wrong, wrong. Scouts have learned that it is foolish to project a QB to the NFL based on the variable of Arm Strength. Yet, they seem to be unable to control their hormones every time a guy like Russell roles around. Who's paying these guys. Quotes like these should be grounds for dismissal so you don't continue to make the same mistakes year after year.
At Athletes' Performance, a specialized training camp in Tempe, Ariz., Martinez joined a team grooming Russell to take his place atop the draft. The chief competition, Brady Quinn of Notre Dame, is more polished and experienced than Russell, with four years as a college starter as opposed to two, yet he showed up in Tempe for some buffing of his own.
YES!! YES!! Four years of college compared to two. THIS IS WHAT MATTERS. This is it. Build on this point. This is the only reason that Brady Quinn will be a better NFL QB then Jamarcus Russell. Gwen Knapp, please oh please don't let throw this point out here without comparing Russell to other first round picks who started less than 30 games in college, and Quinn to other guys who started 45 plus. Just do it, I beg you!
Russell's size makes him both alluring and unnerving, creating doubts about his agility. He can probably absorb a hit very well, but will he lumber around in the pocket, unable to keep up with the speed of the NFL game? At 6-foot-6, he looks more like a tight end than a quarterback, and he reportedly carried as much as 265 pounds when he led LSU past Quinn's Irish in the Sugar Bowl. His fitness advisers in Arizona peeled close to 10 pounds off him, revealing a sleeker model. Martinez immediately went to work on Russell's feet.
GAAHHHHHH!!! NOOOO. Ah, the AGONY!!
I hate bad sportswriting.
In fact, he wanted to put all of Russell's presumed weaknesses on display. Agents create scripts for these events, and they are usually written to obscure areas of doubt. Martinez reasoned that the scouts and coaches would eventually, in private workouts, ask Russell to perform drills that emphasized perceived shortcomings. He wanted the script to answer the big questions, to assure the scouts that Russell had nothing to hide.
Did Martinez find the Denver Broncos' defense and put them out there against the Oakland Raiders offense plus Russell at QB and let JaMarucus strut his stuff. If he didn't do this, I'm really not sure how much of his weaknesses were really on display. JaMarcus' weakness is his inexperience, just like any other QB who has ever come out early. By the time he gets to a point where he makes up the gap between himself and Quinn's college experience, he's probably already going to be a backup somewhere in this league. He's never going to catch Quinn in experience unless Quinn sustaines a multiple year injury.
When you really think about it, making a guy with 2 years of college experience your NFL Quarterback is really no different than a fortune 500 corporation giving a high ranking managerial job to a person who left school half way through his/her college degree to "go pro". I mean, it very well could work out for you. But you try to tell me that the same person would NOT be a more efficent worker if he/she stayed and finished his/her degree.
Now tell me that Russell will be better than Quinn.
By coming out early, Russell already put the sentence on his NFL Career. I'm guessing sometime in his first 4 seasons, he will post a respectable set of numbers, and a bunch of talking heads will talk about how JaMarcus Russell has "arrived". The next year those numbers will completely regress and the only person the mediots won't blame for the regression is Russell himself.
I guess it can be debated if Russell goes number one overall whether or not it was worth it to come out. On one hand, he could have been a bona fide stud QB had he stayed in college another year and produced. On the other, he likely would not be the No. 1 pick in a draft that includes Brian Brohm. Then again, he shouldn't be the No. 1 pick in a draft that involves Quinn, but Brohm could be even better than Quinn.
The Raiders, current owners of the top pick, recently invited Martinez for what was reported to be an interview to become the team's quarterbacks coach. Martinez read it more as "a chance to exchange information," and he filled them in on what he had learned about Russell.
If the Raiders took the opinion of a guy with a clear interest in the matter with any more than a grain of salt, there is no hope for them as an organzation.
Russell's soft-spoken personality? "He's very quiet, very respectful," Martinez said, "He doesn't say much, but he's always taking things in. You can see him sizing things up and figuring people out."
Russell's background? Martinez believes that any NFL executive who meets with Russell's relatives will gain confidence in the decision to draft him. "He has a very grounded family," Martinez said. "They're all squared away. They're not buying into the fanfare around this."
Now, Gwen Knapp, you've discarded all analysis to turn this into a puff piece. Congratulations.
The other information he would like to impart would apply to any 21-year-old. Russell needs stability, continuity on the coaching staff. Martinez once heard Jim Plunkett describe a harrowing period in his career when the quarterbacks coach changed four times in four years. He doesn't want one of the most prodigious talents the game has ever seen to be squandered.
Because Jim Plunkett's career ended just so horribly unfufilled.
Martinez has seen all of Russell's flaws up close, and he still finds himself amazed. He says that Russell, fulfilling a typical scout's request, can stand flat-footed at the goal line and, without moving his body for the necessary torque, throw a ball 77 yards downfield.
That's nothing. Did I tell you about the time that Kyle Boller threw a ball really far from his knees. Russell ain't got nothing on Boller.
He can also sit at the opponent's 40-yard line and throw a ball through the uprights of the goalpost. Cal's Kyle Boller once asserted that he could throw the same pass from the 50 while on his knees. But Russell does it on his backside, relying entirely on his arm. Martinez fondly calls this maneuver "the butt throw."
Shit. This is the most unbelieveable paragraph in professional sportswriting. You are comparing (correctly) JaMarcus Russell to Kyle Boller in a puff piece. DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW RETARDED THAT IS! How can you make this comparision and NOT REALIZE THAT KYLE BOLLER IS A HORRIBLE QUARTERBACK!!
Martinez is a technical wizard, so he probably shouldn't be so impressed. But he can't help himself. Two weeks as JaMarcus Russell's coach turned him into a fanboy.
Okay, so in reality the article says "fan", not "fanboy". I just thought it rolled off the tounge better this way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)