Rocky Landing

Out of curiosity, do you live East, or West of the Mississippi?

To be fair, Ranch dressing is fine on things like, I don’t know... salad? Fun fact: Ranch dressing gets its name from those little flecks of cow poop that give it its unique flavor.

I believe the bet is for leading rusher in the NFL, not just the Bills.

I don’t care about Fantasy Football. I only vaguely know how it works, more or less. But, I’m thinking of taking it up so that I’ll get a better knowledge of other teams, and players.

As per the bolded, I completely agree, and understand the distinction. But, if we are going to talk about Allen’s accuracy issues, I think it’s impirtant to define the terms. And there are many. Does Allen have the ability to accurately throw a football from point A to point B? Yes. Does that make him an accurate passer? No. But, if he has the basic fundamentals, I do believe there are many of the other factors that certainly can be learned. I dont like the Losman comparison. I’m not even saying it isn’t accurate, or appropriate. But, at best, it’s incomplete, and I think such comparisons serve to pigeon hole the subject. JMO.

I strongly suspect that since this study comes out every year from Emory University, it is probably part of a basic statistics course. And, considering the quality of the study, and the annual complaints that get posted every damn year, I’d be surprised if this thing was subjected to any sort of peer review, other than the grade from the professor teaching Statistics 101.

This really depends on how you parse it. Allen can stand, flat-footed, and hit the goal post from 40 yards pretty consistently. But, is lacking anticipation, or the ability to throw a receiver open, or lead a receiver in a short-yard throw on the run a question if accuracy? Maybe so. But, are all of those elements unteachable?

Gore needs, I think, 522 yards to become the number three all time rusher. You can bet he’s going to be fighting for those yards. I dont see Ceasars leaving Shady off the betting line as a snub, or an assumption on their part that Gore will get more yards than Shady. I see it more as an indication of the uncertainty of Shady’s upcoming season. He’s just too hard to predict. He could rush for 1,000, or he could rush for 100. There are too many variables. Sports books don’t like that. And, make no mistake— the Gore line is a sucker bet. There are a lot of Gore fans out there, from all around the country, all wishing he will have a great season. A perfect underdog to get people donating money to the Ceasar’s Palace Sports Book.

Ever notice how Ronin will turn any thread into an excuse to bash Allen?

IDK, Alpha, his ignore list is enormous. And, presenting him with arguments that he does not have an answer for is exactly what gets you on that list. Welcome to the club!

Agree.

I have suspected this for a while, but now I seriously believe that Ronin (Tasker's Ghost) has a personality disorder. ("Hard data" LOL!!!)

They do this every year, and every year it is stupid. By the very fact that a third of the study relies on what they call “fan equity,” which regards how much money fans are willing to spend, immediately puts fans in economically depressed areas, or areas with lower economic indicators (lower wages, property values, local gdp, etc) at a disadvantage. In fact, in a demographic like Tennessee, where people are only willing to spend a fraction of what fans in New York are willing to spend, for example, may be especially deceiving, as the amount Tennesseans are spending as a percentage of their net income might be significantly higher. Does this study adjust for that? I sincerely doubt it. Although, I will say, Rams being dead last makes perfect sense. Worst. Fans. Ever.

You can try?

Their photographer is terrible!

Well, sure. And I’m not really disagreeing with you. But then, if he is infrequently put in a position where he will be able to get to the QB, maybe 4 sacks for the year isn’t so bad? Really, my point (responding to a different poster) was that using such numbers without any context doesn’t prove much. And, really, that other poster is becoming famous for using stats completely out of context.

I wouldn’t know where to find that stat, and it would likely be a bit misleading. Opposing defenses don’t know when the other team is going to run the ball. Certainly, something like 3rd and one vs. Dallas, you know it’s a likely running play. Other situations are far less obvious. Again, I’m just going off my perception, and that may well be deeply flawed. But, convince me otherwise. I think that McD used Shaq primarily to stop the run, and Murphy to pressure the QB. They got rotated a lot. Do you disagree?

Welcome to the club, 4merper4mer.

I couldn't tell you, but I'd be interested to know. My perception was that neither Murphy, nor Lawson were really complete DEs last season, anywhere near the way Hughs has been. When Murphy was active last season, I believe the two were swapped frequently, with Murphy being the better pass rusher, and Lawson used against the run. But, I have no stats, or evidence to back that up. I can't tell you that as I watched the games, I was able to account for all 11 players on the field. and I have no desire (or time) to analyze, play by play, which situations these two were placed in. It was just my perception that last season I watched Lawson work (effectively) in stopping the run, and I watched Murphy pressure the QB a lot more than Shaq. Was this by design? I suspect so.

It's a fair point, but put it all into context: how many regimes for the Bills have lasted more than two years? Doug Marone: '13-14 Rex Ryan: '15-16 McD: '17- ?? A new coaching staff come in, and immediately cleans house. But, in the context of this thread, and with the history of the Bills hiring a new coaching staff every two-three years, it's not really accurate to slam the picks themselves simply because they are no longer with the Bills. If, after being let go by yet another new regime, they went on to have successful careers, you can't really say they were terrible players, or picks. Many just didn't fit the next regime to come in.

Well, if Lawson is generally put in a position to stop the run, and that's what he does, he's not likely to get a lot of sacks. Why would he? And, regarding Murphy, yes. In 2016, Murphy had 9 sacks, 46 tackles, and 25 QB hits in 16 games that he did not start. That is above average, no? So, in the context of Ronin's post, where he claimed that Murphy is "average at best," that would be an incorrect statement. Murphy was, clearly, better than average at his best. And, this year, if reports are correct, he will start the season healthy, for the first time in two years. He is 28 years old. At best, he should be above average. Possibly well above average. Let's hope we get him at his best.

It's a really interesting take on the predictable nature of the Cowboys offense, and how it may have hampered Beasley's production. I don't know enough about the Cowboys system to have much of an opinion on it, but if there is a shred of truth to it, it would seem that Beasley could really thrive in a Daboll offense. So many cool things to watch for this season!

Say Jones agrees.

Lawson was primarily used on likely running downs. Not really fair to fault him for too few sacks. And, to call Murphy "average at best" is to ignore the entire rest of his career.

Dawkins, too.