Why do people at NFLN take Cynthia Frelund seriously?

[The Senator]

2 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

As eball said that's her ceiling

 

On that one, eball is mistaken...

 

 

[njbuff]

I guess it's a good thing I don't watch the NFL Network

 

The NFL Network is the worst of the major sports exclusive networks by a country mile.

 

Rankings.......

 

4. NFL Network

3. MLB Network

2. NBA Network

1. NHL Network

 

I know that the NFL is even below individual sports in this country, but in terms of covering their own sport, the NHL Network is the best one.

[White Linen]

2 hours ago, hmsmystic said:

She's as qualified as any analytics dude to talk football.  She definitely has some predictions correct.  She also happens to be fantastic looking which helps the mostly male audience at NFLN.  I like here and I like Warren Sharpe- they bring some new information to the table, unlike some of those dopey ex players they trot out there.

 

I'll agree with you on the dopey ex players part.  I mean, like I'm going to seriously consider Jones-Drew a draft expert.  

 

On the other hand Frelund is as bad.  I feel like laughing every time they all act stunned at her immense data.

[The Bills Blog]

1 hour ago, The Senator said:

 

Should any mock draft be taken seriously?

 

Aren’t they all nothing but exercises in fun and guesswork, especially the ones that anticipate all sorts of trades based on nothing, and not even knowing which players will be on or off the board?

.

The reason it's frustrating is because hers claims to be all scientific and blah blah blah, but at the end of the day it's just nonsense like all the other mock drafts.

[gobilz]

That beak 

[The Senator]

1 minute ago, The Bills Blog said:

The reason it's frustrating is because hers claims to be all scientific and blah blah blah, but at the end of the day it's just nonsense like all the other mock drafts.

 

You got me there - I can’t think of anything less scientific than a mock draft.

 

Still, I’d rather see her on my TV screen than all the blowhards on ESPN, FOX, and CBS combined.

.

[Scorp83]

6 hours ago, D521646 said:

I ask because I've been watching her now for a good 3 years, and NOTHING she predicts, says, or even comments on is accurate.  1st off, anyone who plays fantasy stay the hell away from any "analytics" advise Frelund gives you, and that's both season fantasy and especially daily fantasy football.  She's total garbage, and her mocks exercises are not even worth the frequency bandwidth of hot air.  Just recently she gives a mock for this years first round of not where she thinks players will go, but which players will have an immediate impact, taking into account what she believes those teams records will be for 2019.  Um.. what?  Why even bother, it's pointless, and zero football knowledge can be gleaned from any of that nonsense, and to watch the guys criticize her without actually criticizing her is laughable, makes me want to puke.  Brooks just literally said that he agreed with Frelund that Haskins could be picked by the Pats at 32 and that (get this) Haskins is Tom Brady 2.0....  Yes he literally just said that!

 

My point, if not made abundantly clear, is, why is this women on TV talking about football like she's some sage of wisdom every week?  Has anyone ever heard her say anything intelligent when it comes to football fantasy or predictive analytics?  Anything?

 

 

Tim-

Buddy... are you serious right now? Have you seen Cynthia? She's smokin hot! My goodness... yes make up a position for her...analytics...sure... fantasy breakdown...sure.  she's like the hottest frickin weather girl talking football... who cares if the numbers are right or now?!?! ???

3 hours ago, BobChalmers said:

 

Yeah - I find her cute in her way, but she is consistently both not profound and generally awful in her projections.  

 

There has to be someone with better math/analytics skills available.

 

 

Her analytics hit more when it comes to fanatsy

[NoSaint]

6 hours ago, D521646 said:

Well, that's the point of this topic.  I'm asking if anyone has ever heard her speak about football and said, "Oh yeah, that makes sense".. Anyone?

 

Tim-

 

I haven’t thought that about you either but you don’t see me making threads about it. Yeesh.

[RiotAct]

4 hours ago, CommonCents said:

Maybe he is more of a Beth Mowins type of guy. 

giggity

[akcash]

she predicted we would go 6-10 last year.

[Orlando Buffalo]

6 hours ago, D521646 said:

I ask because I've been watching her now for a good 3 years, and NOTHING she predicts, says, or even comments on is accurate.  1st off, anyone who plays fantasy stay the hell away from any "analytics" advise Frelund gives you, and that's both season fantasy and especially daily fantasy football.  She's total garbage, and her mocks exercises are not even worth the frequency bandwidth of hot air.  Just recently she gives a mock for this years first round of not where she thinks players will go, but which players will have an immediate impact, taking into account what she believes those teams records will be for 2019.  Um.. what?  Why even bother, it's pointless, and zero football knowledge can be gleaned from any of that nonsense, and to watch the guys criticize her without actually criticizing her is laughable, makes me want to puke.  Brooks just literally said that he agreed with Frelund that Haskins could be picked by the Pats at 32 and that (get this) Haskins is Tom Brady 2.0....  Yes he literally just said that!

 

My point, if not made abundantly clear, is, why is this women on TV talking about football like she's some sage of wisdom every week?  Has anyone ever heard her say anything intelligent when it comes to football fantasy or predictive analytics?  Anything?

 

 

Tim-

Dude she is hot- makes everything she says respectable to a certain segment of audience.

[Peace Frog]

6 hours ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Moderately.

 

Eeew...she's got 'soul eater eyes', like a succubus.

8 minutes ago, akcash said:

she predicted we would go 6-10 last year.

How hard is that to do?

Edited April 9, 2019 by Peace Frog

[oldmanfan]

So taking gender out of the equation, you have someone here who certainly has the education in statistical methods to offer a different perspective on things.  I have said many times in this board that stats are misused constantly by not only posters but the media.  So she brings a fresh approach, like this draft article.  She uses modeling to try and project picks.  I have only seen her a couple times on TV, but her draft article takes an interesting slant.

 

So why is she not that predictive of who wins a game, overall records (assuming she's not, which is itself an estimate)?  Maybe it's because of the complexity of an NFL game, and the huge number of variables that can affect performance.  Which makes statitical analysis very difficult.

[bills11]

She fits in with what they are looking for at NFL network...they want a variety of different things. 

Like the fantasy show is not run by football experts either..she has a different type of approach which is what they want.

If they wanted to be super serious they wouldn't have michael irving and deion doing coverage . 

[ganesh]

8 hours ago, White Linen said:

It's very gimmicky when they go to her for analytic opinion on something.   I suppose it's their attempt to look at the NFL from that angle and she's assigned to the spreadsheets.  

 

It's nothing against her personally.  

she is doing her job...trying to bring predictability to their predictions !!!!!

3 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

So taking gender out of the equation, you have someone here who certainly has the education in statistical methods to offer a different perspective on things.  I have said many times in this board that stats are misused constantly by not only posters but the media.  So she brings a fresh approach, like this draft article.  She uses modeling to try and project picks.  I have only seen her a couple times on TV, but her draft article takes an interesting slant.

 

So why is she not that predictive of who wins a game, overall records (assuming she's not, which is itself an estimate)?  Maybe it's because of the complexity of an NFL game, and the huge number of variables that can affect performance.  Which makes statitical analysis very difficult.

IT is not that the statistical analysis is difficult.  The Modeling is what is difficult and the sample data size in NFL Draft is small enough for it be anything but accurate.

[/dev/null]

7 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

So taking gender out of the equation, you have someone here who certainly has the education in statistical methods to offer a different perspective on things.

 

So taking gender out of the equation, if this guy

 

 

 

developed a reliable and accurate analytic model, would NFLN replace Freulund with him?

[Max Fischer]

This could be said for virtually every sports analyst. Why stop with her when you could do a rant on anyone?

[Solomon Grundy]

16 hours ago, TOboy said:

Pretty sure they'd be roasted in this Me Too era if they dismissed her findings. 

 

 

I'm not sold on anything she says, but at least it's a little different than everybody else who simply bring an opinion like you or I. 

Yeah??? Well Me Three.

[Mr. WEO]

16 hours ago, D521646 said:

I ask because I've been watching her now for a good 3 years, and NOTHING she predicts, says, or even comments on is accurate.  1st off, anyone who plays fantasy stay the hell away from any "analytics" advise Frelund gives you, and that's both season fantasy and especially daily fantasy football.  She's total garbage, and her mocks exercises are not even worth the frequency bandwidth of hot air.  Just recently she gives a mock for this years first round of not where she thinks players will go, but which players will have an immediate impact, taking into account what she believes those teams records will be for 2019.  Um.. what?  Why even bother, it's pointless, and zero football knowledge can be gleaned from any of that nonsense, and to watch the guys criticize her without actually criticizing her is laughable, makes me want to puke.  Brooks just literally said that he agreed with Frelund that Haskins could be picked by the Pats at 32 and that (get this) Haskins is Tom Brady 2.0....  Yes he literally just said that!

 

My point, if not made abundantly clear, is, why is this women on TV talking about football like she's some sage of wisdom every week?  Has anyone ever heard her say anything intelligent when it comes to football fantasy or predictive analytics?  Anything?

 

 

Tim-

 

 

Whoa....

 

 

Anyway, how long have you been listening to Mel Kiper?

[stony]

11 minutes ago, Max Fischer said:

This could be said for virtually every sports analyst. Why stop with her when you could do a rant on anyone?

This thread could exist with 95% of the football talking head community.