They may have DeSean Jackson back for the game, but may be without their top 3 corners...Culliver, Hall and Breeland. I'll be at the game so let's make it a good one.
Dan Steinberg @dcsportsbog 2h2 hours agoWashington, DC
Redskins have given up at least 176 rushing yards while rushing for 51 yards or fewer in 3 straight games. First time in team history
Dan Steinberg @dcsportsbog 4h4 hours agoAshburn, VA
Jay Gruden on talk of a Patriots romp: "On paper, it looks like it."
nattysez said:
I think we can expect to see an offensive game plan exactly the opposite of the plan v. the Jets:
Also, this:
The picks are killing him and driving down the rating. He's like Fitz without the mobility and Harvard pedigree.axx said:For some reason I thought Cousins was more in the average range this year. He's been worse than that, 23rd in passer rating. Tough to see a Skins upset without Cousins having a big day.
Pandemonium67 said:This should be the game in which BB starts prepping for January by making sure all the backups get plenty of playing time. Keep younger guys (used to the shorter college schedule) from getting worn out, reduce the chance of valuable guys from getting injured (that's you, Gronk), and get the backups some reps in case they become the next man up in the months ahead. Even Garapolo.
They'll still win by 30.
DrewDawg said:Pats opening as 12.5 point favorites and it moved to 14 already.
soxhop411 said:wait.. what?
Jane McManusVerified account @janesports 19m19 minutes ago
Oh great, the Society Opposed to Taking Yo Panties Off is planning massive protest at next Washington game.
The PTO has registered hundreds if not thousands of marks that the Team believes are racist, or misogynistic, vulgar, or otherwise offensive. By way of example only, the following marks are registered today: TAKE YO PANTIES OFF clothing.....
The funny part is that this was posted by soxhop in the other thread earlier today. Did he read it?SumnerH said:
http://sonsofsamhorn.net/topic/90273-federal-judge-us-can-be-indian-giversredskins-not-trademarked/?p=6311308 (for the edification of others)
From Washington's court filing:
And a million other hilarious trademarks.
No what I was saying "what" about is the protest. Not the name. Are they really going to protest?djbayko said:The funny part is that this was posted by soxhop in the other thread earlier today. Did he read it?
DrewDawg said:I really don't know where to put this, but it's too ridiculous not to mention.
According to ESPN's QBR metric:
This game by Brady: 26-38, 356 yards, 4/0 TD/INT
was not as good as
this game by Rodgers: 14-22, 77 yards, 0/0 TD/INT
As far as I can tell Rodgers is getting a ton of credit for his 2 rushes for 31 yards, for the lots of penalties on DEN, and the quality of the defense.DrewDawg said:I really don't know where to put this, but it's too ridiculous not to mention.
According to ESPN's QBR metric:
This game by Brady: 26-38, 356 yards, 4/0 TD/INT
was not as good as
this game by Rodgers: 14-22, 77 yards, 0/0 TD/INT
DrewDawg said:I really don't know where to put this, but it's too ridiculous not to mention.
According to ESPN's QBR metric:
This game by Brady: 26-38, 356 yards, 4/0 TD/INT
was not as good as
this game by Rodgers: 14-22, 77 yards, 0/0 TD/INT
One thing that factors in here: QBR discounts YAC, and all of Brady's TDs were YAC-y. The 47-yard TD pass to Gronk was like a four-yard pass.DrewDawg said:I really don't know where to put this, but it's too ridiculous not to mention.
According to ESPN's QBR metric:
This game by Brady: 26-38, 356 yards, 4/0 TD/INT
was not as good as
this game by Rodgers: 14-22, 77 yards, 0/0 TD/INT
BaseballJones said:
It's beyond ridiculous. At some point ESPN needs to look at their metric and conclude it's a complete pile of crap. Right?
pokey_reese said:I mean, I get the criticism, but it's a little like DIPS theory, in that they deliberately don't want to give Brady credit for the YAC (which I don't think is totally wrong of them, Gronk and Edelman earn those yards), and conversely a QB shouldn't be punished for not having good weapons around him. Its the same for overrating the rushing by a QB (which I don't totally agree with), but they are basically saying, here are offensive contributions directly made by the QB, as opposed to made possible by the QB.
I think it is a flawed stat for sure, and this is a great example of how it fails some outlier/robustness tests, but I think that some of the concepts are sound, if poorly executed.
This is true. In QBR's defense, whether that becomes 10-15 yards of YAC or 40 yards of YAC wouldn't seem to have much to do with the QB. In general, I don't take QBR seriously, because it's a black box and I don't find it has more merit than non-black-box options like ANY/A.JGray38 said:But you can argue that a good QB will make a better pass that allows for more YAC- not throwing too far off target, hitting runners in stride, as well as recognizing who is open. This stat discounts that, and I think those are real abilities.
Super Nomario said:This is true. In QBR's defense, whether that becomes 10-15 yards of YAC or 40 yards of YAC wouldn't seem to have much to do with the QB. In general, I don't take QBR seriously, because it's a black box and I don't find it has more merit than non-black-box options like ANY/A.
Sure, but that play is going to score well in an air-yards-based system because it did travel pretty far in the air.tims4wins said:
Maybe the YAC has everything to do with the QB, though. On some plays, sure, it will be a one man effort to break tackles, make people miss, beat them with speed down the field, whatever. But there are plenty of plays where many NFL JAGs could just as easily gain the yardage because it is a great play design, great throw by the QB, awful defense, whatever. One example that comes to mind is the Welker 99 yard TD at Miami a few years ago. After he caught it he basically just had to outrun the defense. There was no special effort made by the WR on that play; the play was possible because of a perfect throw by Brady.
DrewDawg said:Top YAC QBs this season by yardage (7 or more games):
Rivers, Brees, Brady--each over 50% of their yards
Bottom:
Newton, Bortles, Winston--each under 40% of their yards
Accuracy, but also decision making and pre-snap adjustments?Tony C said:
Just that list of QBs is indicative of the issue with not counting YAC -- high YACs for highly accurate QBs and the reverse in re Newton, Bortles, and Winston -- each of whom are scattershot (at least Newton and Bortles are, I'm just assuming Winston).