Appreciating how the Old Ones played. Or: Joe Namath in the 2000s, continuing...

by Jim Glass

If you haven't read Part I of this, you probably should to get the context and some details about the numbers being used here.

[] Passing game changes, 1970s to 2000s. These numbers for passing statistic averages and standard deviations show how passing norms have changed since the 1970s.

("SD%" = the standard deviation divided by the average for the stat. For instance, for yards-per-completion the SD% of .128 for is the SD of 1.47 divided by the average of 11.53)

The bulk of the difference between eras results from rule changes. In 1978 the NFL adopted major rule changes to favor the passing game (see "The Top Ten Things that Changed the Game") and has steadily followed up on them since. The result has been shorter, safer, higher-percentage passing, and more of it.

Appreciating how the Old Ones played. Or: Joe Namath in the 2000s.

by Jim Glass

The way NFL football is played has changed over the decades. Statistics in part reflect this, as seen in the steady inflation of passer rating.

But more importantly, what wins games has changed – and this is not reflected in commonly used rating and ranking stats. So even using "inflation adjusted" ratings leads to mistaken conclusions about players of the past when the ratings are based on performance measures that matter the most to us today – but not the ones that mattered most to them.

This article opens with a little rant, then presents the results of multivariate regressions run for the periods 1971-5 and 2006-10 to identify changes in performance measures that matter most to winning.

To illustrate how big these changes have been, it ends by translating Joe Namath's passing numbers – particularly for his 1972 season - into 2010 terms.

MRE - Measure of Random Events through week 4

by Bruce D

MRE = (good luck points)-(bad luck points), so positive numbers are the luckiest teams.

For a more in-depth explanation of what "luck" points are, go to a previous post here.

If random events can't be repeated, then past points due to MRE can NOT be considered as being due to skill. Likewise, past performance due to MRE can't be included in analyzing future performance. In a nutshell, "lucky" teams can't be expected to be so "lucky", and "unlucky" teams are better than we may think.

Points for(+) the lucky team, are the same amount of points against(-) the unlucky team.

MRE is valued as follows:

punts blocked=3
interceptions=2.5
fumbles lost=2.5
field goal miss/block=2.5
punt returns for a TD=4.5
ko returns for a TD=4.5

Luck points through week 3

by Bruce D.

Team luck points = (good luck points)-(bad luck points), so positive numbers are the luckiest teams. Please note that this is change from previous posts where negative numbers were used for the luckiest teams.

Please note: In a predictive situation, past "good luck" can be bad for a team in the future, and past "bad luck" can be good(luck is NOT repeatable).

For a more in-depth explanation of what "luck" points are, go to a previous post here.

Luck is tracked to help analyze a team's true ability and to predict results of upcoming games where some may not know what portion of a team's record and points performance was due to just luck.

Points for(+) the lucky team, are the same amount of points against(-) the unlucky team.

Luck Points for the New Season

by Bruce D

Team luck points = (bad luck points)-(good luck points), so negative numbers are the luckiest
For a more in-depth explanation of what "luck" points are, go to a previous post here.
Luck is tracked to better analyze a team's true ability and to help predict results of upcoming games where some may not know what portion of a team's record and points performance was due to just luck.

Nearly Impossible to Pick the RAVENS PLAYER OF THE GAME

by Borat
Before yesterday, JOE FLACCO was 2-6 against the Steelers — 0-6 when Ben Roethlisberger has played and 0-2 in the playoffs — with a 53 percent completion rate, seven touchdowns and eight interceptions. Against all other teams, his W/L record is 34-13 — 4-1 in the playoffs — with a 65 percent completion rate, and he has twice as many touchdowns as interceptions, 54-27. Also he had lost five fumbles against the Steelers in 8 games, and only five total against everyone else in 47 games. Yesterday Flacco passed for 224 yards including 3 TDs was sacked only once and did not fumble. His Passer rating was 117.6.

Dispatches From the Anti-League: #1

by James Sinclair

My fantasy football league consists entirely of guys in their mid-to-late 20s who have excess quantities of both free time and snarkiness, so it was only a matter of time before six of us started a separate "Anti-League", in which the goal is to compile the worst team possible.

Assuming we weren't exactly breaking new ground, I looked around online for write-ups of similar leagues and, sure enough, found a handful of efforts, but none that go into any real depth about rules, settings, tactics, and in general how to create a league that actually works. So I'm going to (try to) do just that. I'll check back in after tonight's draft, and probably a few more times during the season with updates, observations, and tales of strategy decisions gone hilariously awry. For now, here's an overview of how the Anti-League is set up:

Rosters
Nobody in this league is the sort of NFL fan who can name, say, the Bengals' No. 3 receiver. But, without taking a formal poll, I'd bet at least half of us can name the Bengals' quarterback. (Incidentally, I wonder if Andy Dalton can name the Bengals' No.3 receiver?) Point is, unlike running backs and receivers, quarterbacks often become household names merely by virtue of being less skilled than their peers, even if they aren't egregiously overpaid or facing criminal charges (though it doesn't hurt). So, we're going with two starting QBs, but only one RB and one WR.