Dibs

So he did(Injury replacement).....hasn't shown up on the usual site I check. He's not a FA though.....becomes one in 2014. BTW, he is on a $4.3M/year contract.

When was Incognito in the pro bowl?

I haven't looked at Cincy but..... Indy has 9 starters that hit FA this off-season including Freeney & #2 WR Avery.......plus punter and 7 key backups.

You are despairing over something that has not even been rumoured to be true. They have good medication now a days for this sort of thing.

Are you surprised that it is as high as #7.....or as low as #7?

I think some people jump to the wrong conclusion with many analytical studies. The studies I am doing on past drafts aren't so much about using historical stats to pick players.....they're about using statistics to determine how effective the consensus "eye test" actually is.....and attempts to determine the actual likelihood of prospects developing into NFL starters/stars for their drafting team. So far, form my studies of QB, LB & WR drafts I have discovered several things which show where the effectiveness of the "eye test" is either very good, or not. QBs rarely succeed if picked outside the #34 pick. Therefore if you are after one, make sure you grab one that the "eye test" factors as a 1st rounder. LBs & WRs are just as likely to succeed from the 3rd round as from the 2nd. Therefore if you are after one, try to get an "eye tested" 3rd round potential one as it is better value. LBs show a surprising success rate when selected from rounds 4 & 5. Therefore if you are after one(or more), try to trade down in the 2nd/3rd to be able to select more LBs that the "eye test" has rated as 4th & 5th rounders. Being able to determine how effective the consensus "eye test" is, is potentially an extremely valuable tool.

A bunch? How about all of them.....twice. It's likely there is a good chance that they dismissed him for more reasons than him being too short.

I guess the queston is whether the Bills will do a similar carry over system with their C2C left over money.

Am I the only one here who sees the irony in this statement?

lol....I was just in the process of posting the exact same thing.

Thanks for that Tcali. It's often hard to determine the relative ability of players who played before ones own era. I remember the end of Simms carreer and recall him being widely considered as a very good QB.....but not in the same level as Montana, Elway, Marino, Kelly etc. Just looking at stats it appears that Theismann was only good in the last third of his carreer....which is perhaps reflective of how misleading stats can be. The stats on Plunkett however in no way show his potential elite status. No pro-bowls....and many many years of horrible numbers. These sort of historical recolections are IMO one of the reasons why Andre Reed gets overlooked for HOF considerations. His stats don't fully reflect what his abilities were. It's scary to think that in perhaps 20 years time, Ruben Brown....with his 9 pro-bowls....might get historical HOF considerations. The "eye test" is still the best way IMO to determine a player's abilities.....the difficult part is determining who's "eye" should be used.

As it happens, I did a study recently on the drafting success of QBs (Here: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/155235-drafting-success-qb/?do=findComment&comment=2712778). Though this study didn't cover QBs drafted after 2005....so I acknowledge that it is possible there could have been a significant change in that time.....it clearly suggests certain aspects which I think are relevant to your statement above. What the numbers in the 20 year analysis show is that QB talent seems to be extremely well graded in ralation to drafting them. Any QB who seems to have that something special, that "it factor", is generally recognized as such and is uniformly predicted to go in the Top 4 of the draft....and is invariably selected in the Top 4 of the draft. These QBs have a very high success rate for their drafting teams. 26% become good to very good starters.....with another 21% becoming Star QBs. Any other QB who is considered to have a good chance of becoming something special are typically rated and drafted between picks 5-34. The success rate for these QBs was....8.3% became good to very good starters....with another 8.3% becoming Star QBs. The relative draft position within picks 5-34 did not seem to effect the chance of success. This implies that the ability to differentiate between the relative success chances of these QBs is not possible for scouts/analysts....or at least not possible within a reasonable percentage difference. For all other QBs scouted and assessed, none succeeded from the 2nd & 3rd rounds.... In relation to your comments..... It appears there will be 3-4(?) QBs in this draft class that will fall into the second catagory and are likely to be selected in the 5-34 range. (none in the Top 4 range). Next years draft class might see 2 QBs in the Top 4 catagory(making it a good QB draft class).....but how many others will fall into the 5-34 range? 1-2? Assuming we will not have a Top 4 pick in next years draft....and that it might prove difficult to trade up into the Top 4 to get one of those "special" QB draft prospects....there is actually a better chance that we will be able to select a QB of relative decent potential in this draft(3-4 QBs) than in next years draft(1-2 QBs). Btw....those "defensive cornerstone" players more often than not do not end up becoming "solid starters" let alone "cornerstone" players for the drafting team. (LB study here: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/155307-drafting-success-lb/?do=findComment&comment=2714704)

Thanks mrags(and everyone). I do these studies for my own personal interest.....but it is still nice to get a pat on the back for it. In relation to your "elite QB" comments.....I tend to look at it that a QB with the "it factor" has that special something even before they have accumulated enough experience to show themselves as being an "elite QB". Brady isn't considered elite because he won several SBs early in his career....he is considered elite because of his consistent elite level play. He obviously has the "it factor". Using Roethlisberger as an example....I was quite dubious of his abilities after his first 2 seasons. He had a great run game & D to work with and was obviously being reigned in and limited in how much he contributed to the team. I had these reservations about him until I saw him play in his 3rd(?) season. In the game that I watched he did some absolutely amazing things which kept drives alive and helped earn them the W. "Elite QB" is obviously unquantifiable. Early Elway shows us that it is not just stats. Everybody who saw him play knew he was special, even though his statistics were average at best. It isn't just SB wins....Kelly & Marino are testament to that. It is having the "it factor". In the list of the 11 Star SB QBs(post #10), the only one that I personally have reservations about is Eli Manning. For my mind he is too erratic and streaky to be considered an "elite QB". I have not however seen a great deal of his play.....his potential was recognized pre-draft as great....he led his team to 2 SB victories, one of which was with the worst running game in the league and a bottom 10 Defense....and he is widely considered "elite"....so what do I know lol. I'm not sure what you meant here. Though this used to be the case(nearly all SB winning teams had a top 10 if not top 5 D prior to 2000), it is no longer a truism. Having a strong D is certainly still a key component for ones chances to win the SB but it is no longer a "must have". SB winning ranked Ds.... 2012 Ravens 17/13 2011 Giants 27/25 2009 Saints 25/20 2007 Giants 7/17 2006 Colts 21/23 It however certainly seems to be a "must have" if you don't have an elite QB....the 2 SBs won by non-elite QBs in the last 20years were won with a #1 & #2 ranked D. Since every single time in the past 20 year an elite QB has defeated a non-elite QB.....and half the time the losing team has an elite QB as well, putting together an elite defense or running game is obviously a distant secondary consideration when thinking how one is to build a team in order to win a SB. For interest sake though, here is a list of the SB match ups since 2000 with their defensive rankings. (Am only going back to 2000 as the stats above clearly show a changing point in the NFL at that time). (Highest ranked D listed first....red for winner)....(Star QB underlined....except 2012) 2012: 49ers(4) v Ravens(17) 2011: Giants(27) v Patriots(31) 2010: Steelers(2) v Packers(5) 2009: Colts(18) v Saints(25) 2008: Steelers(1) v Cardinals(19) 2007: Patriots(4) v Giants(7) 2006: Bears(5) v Colts(21) 2005: Steelers(4) v Seahawks(17) 2004: Patriots(9) v Eagles(10) 2003: Patriots(7) v Panthers(8) 2002: Buccaneers(1) v Raiders(11) 2001: Rams(3) v Patriots(24) 2000: Ravens(2) v Giants(5) Results are basically even. 7 wins for the better D....6 wins for the worse D. In games where the D rank difference is 10 or more(6 games).....3 wins each. You likely hate the concept but.....the NFL has changed to the point where it can no longer be said that Defense wins Championships.

Most of us Bills fans have forgotten how technically easy it is to get into the playoffs. The odds have changed over the years due to number of teams/playoff spots....but I've done a calculation & the average for the purposes of this exercise is very close to the current chance to make the playoffs 37.5% Using 37.5% as the average..... Last 21 years: Playoff appearances for Star SB winning QBs (In years they started 11+ games). Troy Aikman: 8 in 12 years (66.7%) Steve Young: 7 in 8 years (87.5%) Brett Favre: 12 in 19 years (63.2%) John Elway: 9 in 15 years (60%) Kurt Warner: 5 in 6 years (83.3%) Tom Brady: 10 in 11 years (90.9%) Roethlisberger: 6 in 9 years (66.7%) P. Manning: 12 in 14 years (85.7%) E. Manning: 5 in 8 years (62.5%) Drew Brees: 5 in 11 years (45.5%) Aaron Rogers: 4 in 5 years (80%) Flacco: 5 in 5 years (100%) Playoff appearances for non-star SB winning QBs (In years they started 11+ games). Trent Dilfer: 1 in 5 years (20%) Brad Johnson: 4 in 7 years (57.1%) The results above were pretty much expected IMO. Though I don't really see a relevance to it.....I looked through while I did the previous stats.... Of the 11 different Star QBs who won the SB in the last 20 years, 6 of them performed well in their first 3 years without a good(top 10) running game or defense. These were P. Manning, Elway, Favre, Warner, Brady & Rodgers(his was 4th year+ as he was backup for first 3 seasons).

That Karma ran over the Ref's dogma.

Yep.....Brad Johnson & Trent Dilfer were the 2 in the last 21 years. The 3 in the 5 previous were....Mark Rypien, Jeff Hostetler & Doug Williams There were another 4 in the 5 year before that Phil Simms, Jim McMahon, Jim Plunkett, Joe Theismann, Winning with a journeyman QB who has a good season or two seemed to be very common. 7 in a 10 year span.....2 in the following 20 years.

Yesterday I read a post stating the old axiom of “Defense wins championships”. I wondered if this is still a truism in the modern NFL or not. It also got me thinking about similar theories that I have heard over the years and whether there is any specific area that one needs to be dominant in to win a SB. Subsequently I started analysing data from past SB winning teams in order to try and determine obvious patterns. As I progressed, the data started to intrigue me on additional levels….so I kept collating. I feel that I may have overdone it a bit….but for those interested, this is what I found. I ended up selecting the season rankings of the last 26 SB winning teams(2012 season for the 2013 SB champ etc). I broke these stats up into… Total Offense/Defense Passing Offense/Defense Rushing Offense/Defense As there are different schools of thought on which stats best represent these categories, I collated two statistics for each one. Total Yards O&D and Points For/Against Passing Yards O&D and Passer Rating O&D Rushing Yards O&D and Rushing Yards/Attempt O&D I also noted which SBs were won with/without a Star QB. This was of course opinion based and anybody is free to argue the validity of certain choices made. I put a “?” for Flacco as there is still hot debate whether he can be considered a great QB or merely a good one. Data in attachment: How to win a Super Bowl1.doc (Word doc) One thing that visually stood out was the single digit rankings. There seems to be a clear change from the year 2000. Every category has a higher(often much higher) number of “Top 10” years prior to the 2000 season. Due to this apparent division I decided to study 26 years(double the 13 years from 2012-2000). For those interested, I actually looked at 36 years of numbers with years 27-36 showing similar results to years 14-26. To further study the numbers, I summarized the results into categories, and the number of SB winning teams for each category. Categories are….Top 5, Top 10, Bottom 5, Bottom 10 I also decided to apply a points grading system. I did this so that each individual rank could have effect on the study as well as to get a clear summarized number for each category in order to more easily compare them. I gave a #1 ranked category 28 pts, #2 27 pts, #3 26 pts etc. Zero being lowest points earned. Furthering to that I also averaged out the grading numbers for the two sub-categories in each category. Example: Total Yards O + Points For. Data in attachment: How to win a Super Bowl2.doc (Word doc) Looking at these summaries one can clearly see a distinction between the 2012-2000 years and the 1999-1987 years. It seems that prior to 2000, teams needed to be good-dominant in nearly all areas as well as not being poor-bad in any area to win the SB. 2000+ teams however are nearly always lacking in several areas, with teams that are poor-bad in a certain area being able to regularly win the big one. The only thing that I can think of to explain such a disparity between the eras is the flow on effects of Free Agency(1993)….but I am dubious that it would take 8 years for this to effect the SB winning teams to such a drastic measure. Comparing the results with the old axioms and sayings is quite telling…. “Defense Wins Championships” Appears to have been true pre-2000 with 7/8 of 13 teams having a Top 5 D with another 4/5 being in the top 10. It is however misleading as 12/11 of 13 teams also had a Top 5 Offense. In relation to 2000+ teams, it is perhaps appropriate to say that “A good D helps win Championships” as only 5/7 had a Top 5 D with only another 3/1 being in the top 10. Total Offense however takes a huge step backwards in importance in the modern NFL. Only 2/3 were Top 5 plus 3/5 Top 10. A quick look at the first table shows many teams being of average or below average in the Offensive Yards/Points categories. “Run the ball & Stop the run” I won’t list the numbers as before(look in attachment 2) but it seems that prior to 2000 this was quite true(though the same could be said for the passing game)….but since 2000, the importance of the run game seems to have been greatly diminished. “In the modern NFL you need to be able to stop the pass” Fairly True. 9 of 13 teams had a Top 10 D for Passer Rate….but that figure was 10 for pre-2000 teams so the theory should not be limited to the “modern” NFL. I won’t go through any more common theories as there really isn’t any perceivable pattern to suggest a formula for victory from the modern data. There is however one area that clearly has commonality with modern SB winning teams. The Star QB. Starting QBs of winning SB teams… (As mentioned earlier, I am calling Flacco a “?” QB. Therefore I will assume 2011-1987 as a 25 year sample for the purpose of this study). Last 25 seasons 20 Stars 5 non-stars Last 20 seasons 18 Stars 2 non-stars Unfortunately for us Bills fans, it seems the only common factor in the modern era for winning a SB is having a Star QB. Fingers crossed we find one this off-season.

Was that sarcasm?

I believe that every obvious penalty that occurs should incur a flag. It just happens that the play being discussed was at the end of the game....hence the opinion that it should have been flagged.....just like any other obvious penalty. That being said however....penalties(or non called penalties) are actually more important for the refs to get correct, as the effected team has no chance to overcome the ref's error, unlike during a mid game ref stuff-up. I would be spitting chips if I was a 49ers fan. (Is that a purely Aussie expression?)

I have now changed my opinion. Flacco will be a new $20M+ man soon enough.

Very well put.

I want cake!!!!!

Scott is a FA in 2013 so he is gone already. He was on a 1 year veteran minimums contract so he was relatively cheap.....but I'm with you, I doubt he will be re-signed.

Just nitpicking here.... ......are you aware that no NFL HC has won a SB for two separate teams?

I think that unfortunately the stats become a bigger factor as time progresses, and people forget how good players like Reed(who has lesser stats in many areas) were.