Anchorage's entire secondary would be in it I know that for sure.
sting004
offline
offline
Not really. Face some of the top eastern teams first.
I'd like sabresandkane to do it since he's pretty unbiased in his reports. That goes a long way to me.
I'd like sabresandkane to do it since he's pretty unbiased in his reports. That goes a long way to me.
Warlock
offline
offline
After the last game of the season, a list of the top 5 performers per position should be made, then a small committee should vote on the top two (per position). If you want to take it a step farther, divide the lists into East and West (3 from each, but only 2 get voted in), this will give you the pro-bowl teams.
We'd just need a couple people to compile the lists. I did it for FBs last season and it took me like 30 mins (but then again that's a tough position to gather vital stats for... such as pancakes and broken tackles). OL need something more than pancakes as the only stat, so I'd suggest using the team's rushing/passing numbers as well.
Anyways, just an idea.
We'd just need a couple people to compile the lists. I did it for FBs last season and it took me like 30 mins (but then again that's a tough position to gather vital stats for... such as pancakes and broken tackles). OL need something more than pancakes as the only stat, so I'd suggest using the team's rushing/passing numbers as well.
Anyways, just an idea.
cberry
offline
offline
Originally posted by sting004
Not really. Face some of the top eastern teams first.
I'd like sabresandkane to do it since he's pretty unbiased in his reports. That goes a long way to me.
There's a difference between skill in the East and the West but it's not THAT big.
We have the INT leader in Footz Baller and we have Champ Berry who solidified himself last season as a play making king. I would think that's enough for evidence.
Not really. Face some of the top eastern teams first.
I'd like sabresandkane to do it since he's pretty unbiased in his reports. That goes a long way to me.
There's a difference between skill in the East and the West but it's not THAT big.
We have the INT leader in Footz Baller and we have Champ Berry who solidified himself last season as a play making king. I would think that's enough for evidence.
cberry
offline
offline
Originally posted by Warlock
After the last game of the season, a list of the top 5 performers per position should be made, then a small committee should vote on the top two (per position). If you want to take it a step farther, divide the lists into East and West (3 from each, but only 2 get voted in), this will give you the pro-bowl teams.
We'd just need a couple people to compile the lists. I did it for FBs last season and it took me like 30 mins (but then again that's a tough position to gather vital stats for... such as pancakes and broken tackles). OL need something more than pancakes as the only stat, so I'd suggest using the team's rushing/passing numbers as well.
Anyways, just an idea.
I'll unbiased-ly do it for CBs.
After the last game of the season, a list of the top 5 performers per position should be made, then a small committee should vote on the top two (per position). If you want to take it a step farther, divide the lists into East and West (3 from each, but only 2 get voted in), this will give you the pro-bowl teams.
We'd just need a couple people to compile the lists. I did it for FBs last season and it took me like 30 mins (but then again that's a tough position to gather vital stats for... such as pancakes and broken tackles). OL need something more than pancakes as the only stat, so I'd suggest using the team's rushing/passing numbers as well.
Anyways, just an idea.
I'll unbiased-ly do it for CBs.
Lef Grebo
offline
offline
Originally posted by Cberry
Originally posted by sting004
Not really. Face some of the top eastern teams first.
I'd like sabresandkane to do it since he's pretty unbiased in his reports. That goes a long way to me.
There's a difference between skill in the East and the West but it's not THAT big.
We have the INT leader in Footz Baller and we have Champ Berry who solidified himself last season as a play making king. I would think that's enough for evidence.
OK, let's get real here:
Interceptions
Player Int
footz Baller 4
Lester"The Molester" Hayes 4
Torch Johnson 4
Joe Rippa 4
footz is TIED for the lead with 3 other players....
Originally posted by sting004
Not really. Face some of the top eastern teams first.
I'd like sabresandkane to do it since he's pretty unbiased in his reports. That goes a long way to me.
There's a difference between skill in the East and the West but it's not THAT big.
We have the INT leader in Footz Baller and we have Champ Berry who solidified himself last season as a play making king. I would think that's enough for evidence.
OK, let's get real here:
Interceptions
Player Int
footz Baller 4
Lester"The Molester" Hayes 4
Torch Johnson 4
Joe Rippa 4
footz is TIED for the lead with 3 other players....
cberry
offline
offline
Originally posted by Lef Grebo
Originally posted by Cberry
Originally posted by sting004
Not really. Face some of the top eastern teams first.
I'd like sabresandkane to do it since he's pretty unbiased in his reports. That goes a long way to me.
There's a difference between skill in the East and the West but it's not THAT big.
We have the INT leader in Footz Baller and we have Champ Berry who solidified himself last season as a play making king. I would think that's enough for evidence.
OK, let's get real here:
Interceptions
Player Int
footz Baller 4
Lester"The Molester" Hayes 4
Torch Johnson 4
Joe Rippa 4
footz is TIED for the lead with 3 other players....
Lets get real:
Does that not make him one of the INT leaders? Or does that automatically make him last? Am I missing something? None of those CBs at the top have an INT for a TD and that's usually the tie breaker for the alpha of the pack.
Or am I still missing something?
Originally posted by Cberry
Originally posted by sting004
Not really. Face some of the top eastern teams first.
I'd like sabresandkane to do it since he's pretty unbiased in his reports. That goes a long way to me.
There's a difference between skill in the East and the West but it's not THAT big.
We have the INT leader in Footz Baller and we have Champ Berry who solidified himself last season as a play making king. I would think that's enough for evidence.
OK, let's get real here:
Interceptions
Player Int
footz Baller 4
Lester"The Molester" Hayes 4
Torch Johnson 4
Joe Rippa 4
footz is TIED for the lead with 3 other players....
Lets get real:
Does that not make him one of the INT leaders? Or does that automatically make him last? Am I missing something? None of those CBs at the top have an INT for a TD and that's usually the tie breaker for the alpha of the pack.
Or am I still missing something?
sabresandkane
offline
offline
I dont think i've ever heard of INT for a TD being the tie breaker, and there are many other stats for a CB that make more sense in determining whose better. I will agree though that Footz is a monster and i'm glad I don't have to see him until we face you guys in the championship game.........!
Warlock
offline
offline
Originally posted by Cberry
Originally posted by Warlock
After the last game of the season, a list of the top 5 performers per position should be made, then a small committee should vote on the top two (per position). If you want to take it a step farther, divide the lists into East and West (3 from each, but only 2 get voted in), this will give you the pro-bowl teams.
We'd just need a couple people to compile the lists. I did it for FBs last season and it took me like 30 mins (but then again that's a tough position to gather vital stats for... such as pancakes and broken tackles). OL need something more than pancakes as the only stat, so I'd suggest using the team's rushing/passing numbers as well.
Anyways, just an idea.
I'll unbiased-ly do it for CBs.
It's all about stats, can't really be biased (except in determining which stats are most important). I'd say that order of importance should be...
1A. Interceptions
1B. Interception return yardage
2. Pass deflections
3. Tackles
4A. Forced Fumbles
4B. Fumble Recoveries
4C. Fumble return yardage
5. Touchdowns
6. Sacks
7. Safeties
So I'd take the top 5 or 6 players with interceptions (if more than 5 or 6 are tied with the same number, start breaking it down by return yardage). Out of those 5 or 6, then break it down via pass deflections. Then break it down even further by tackles... etc...
So a list might look like...
CB#1 = 5 INTs (54 yds), 37 PD, 72 Tackles, 2 FF (1 FR for 3 yds), 1 Def TD, 2 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#2 = 5 INTs (43 yds), 40 PD, 68 Tackles, 1 FF (2 FR for 7 yds), 0 Def TD, 0 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#3 = 4 INTs (31 yds), 45 PD, 50 Tackles, 0 FF (1 FR for 1 yds), 0 Def TD, 1 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#4 = 4 INTs (31 yds), 32 PD, 61 Tackles, 1 FF (0 FR for 0 yds), 0 Def TD, 3 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#5 = 4 INTs (31 yds), 32 PD, 59 Tackles, 1 FF (3 FR for 9 yds), 0 Def TD, 0 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
Just an example, but big plays = recognition, typically. This is why I have a big importance for INTs.
I would say that we really only have two options for this concept...
A) Create the player pool based on statistics, which a committee then votes on.
B) Create the player pool based on popularity. We could have each team nominate it's 3-4 best players, then have a committee vote on their picks.
I believe the stats approach is much fairer, you have to be somewhere in the top of the league leaders page to even get into the pool. It's pretty much the approach I took for compiling the FB list... the top 5 FBs in rushing yardage were included, then I threw up a bunch of other important stats for a FB (like pancakes, YPC, TDs, etc...). Obviously FB is a kind of intangible position, but if you want recognition, you have to stand out among other FBs (I used rushing yardage as the primary measuring stick, because there's not many that were even on the top 50 rushing list).
Having each nominee submit a "best play" of the season highlight is a nice touch also IMHO.
Originally posted by Warlock
After the last game of the season, a list of the top 5 performers per position should be made, then a small committee should vote on the top two (per position). If you want to take it a step farther, divide the lists into East and West (3 from each, but only 2 get voted in), this will give you the pro-bowl teams.
We'd just need a couple people to compile the lists. I did it for FBs last season and it took me like 30 mins (but then again that's a tough position to gather vital stats for... such as pancakes and broken tackles). OL need something more than pancakes as the only stat, so I'd suggest using the team's rushing/passing numbers as well.
Anyways, just an idea.
I'll unbiased-ly do it for CBs.
It's all about stats, can't really be biased (except in determining which stats are most important). I'd say that order of importance should be...
1A. Interceptions
1B. Interception return yardage
2. Pass deflections
3. Tackles
4A. Forced Fumbles
4B. Fumble Recoveries
4C. Fumble return yardage
5. Touchdowns
6. Sacks
7. Safeties
So I'd take the top 5 or 6 players with interceptions (if more than 5 or 6 are tied with the same number, start breaking it down by return yardage). Out of those 5 or 6, then break it down via pass deflections. Then break it down even further by tackles... etc...
So a list might look like...
CB#1 = 5 INTs (54 yds), 37 PD, 72 Tackles, 2 FF (1 FR for 3 yds), 1 Def TD, 2 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#2 = 5 INTs (43 yds), 40 PD, 68 Tackles, 1 FF (2 FR for 7 yds), 0 Def TD, 0 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#3 = 4 INTs (31 yds), 45 PD, 50 Tackles, 0 FF (1 FR for 1 yds), 0 Def TD, 1 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#4 = 4 INTs (31 yds), 32 PD, 61 Tackles, 1 FF (0 FR for 0 yds), 0 Def TD, 3 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#5 = 4 INTs (31 yds), 32 PD, 59 Tackles, 1 FF (3 FR for 9 yds), 0 Def TD, 0 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
Just an example, but big plays = recognition, typically. This is why I have a big importance for INTs.
I would say that we really only have two options for this concept...
A) Create the player pool based on statistics, which a committee then votes on.
B) Create the player pool based on popularity. We could have each team nominate it's 3-4 best players, then have a committee vote on their picks.
I believe the stats approach is much fairer, you have to be somewhere in the top of the league leaders page to even get into the pool. It's pretty much the approach I took for compiling the FB list... the top 5 FBs in rushing yardage were included, then I threw up a bunch of other important stats for a FB (like pancakes, YPC, TDs, etc...). Obviously FB is a kind of intangible position, but if you want recognition, you have to stand out among other FBs (I used rushing yardage as the primary measuring stick, because there's not many that were even on the top 50 rushing list).
Having each nominee submit a "best play" of the season highlight is a nice touch also IMHO.
shacky21
offline
offline
why would return yardage be more important than passes deflected? As long as they get the turnover, return yardage is gravy. I'll take a shutdown corner who bats alot of balls away and gets no picks before the corner who gets one lucky pick for a 99yd return.
The other problem with guaging CB's, is that if they always cover their man less balls get thrown their way. Less opporunity for picks, deflections, and tackles.
The other problem with guaging CB's, is that if they always cover their man less balls get thrown their way. Less opporunity for picks, deflections, and tackles.
Last edited Jun 23, 2008 06:02:35
Lef Grebo
offline
offline
Originally posted by Cberry
Originally posted by Lef Grebo
Originally posted by Cberry
Originally posted by sting004
Not really. Face some of the top eastern teams first.
I'd like sabresandkane to do it since he's pretty unbiased in his reports. That goes a long way to me.
There's a difference between skill in the East and the West but it's not THAT big.
We have the INT leader in Footz Baller and we have Champ Berry who solidified himself last season as a play making king. I would think that's enough for evidence.
OK, let's get real here:
Interceptions
Player Int
footz Baller 4
Lester"The Molester" Hayes 4
Torch Johnson 4
Joe Rippa 4
footz is TIED for the lead with 3 other players....
Lets get real:
Does that not make him one of the INT leaders? Or does that automatically make him last? Am I missing something? None of those CBs at the top have an INT for a TD and that's usually the tie breaker for the alpha of the pack.
Or am I still missing something?
My point was you represented footz as THE int leader, when he was tied with 3 other guys. That short changes the other 3. He IS tied for the int lead, but that is not what you posted. You posted the he WAS the int leader.
But before we all get to ahead of ourselves, it is WAY too early to start saying one player is head and shoulders above the rest. There is a lot of football yet to be played.
Originally posted by Lef Grebo
Originally posted by Cberry
Originally posted by sting004
Not really. Face some of the top eastern teams first.
I'd like sabresandkane to do it since he's pretty unbiased in his reports. That goes a long way to me.
There's a difference between skill in the East and the West but it's not THAT big.
We have the INT leader in Footz Baller and we have Champ Berry who solidified himself last season as a play making king. I would think that's enough for evidence.
OK, let's get real here:
Interceptions
Player Int
footz Baller 4
Lester"The Molester" Hayes 4
Torch Johnson 4
Joe Rippa 4
footz is TIED for the lead with 3 other players....
Lets get real:
Does that not make him one of the INT leaders? Or does that automatically make him last? Am I missing something? None of those CBs at the top have an INT for a TD and that's usually the tie breaker for the alpha of the pack.
Or am I still missing something?
My point was you represented footz as THE int leader, when he was tied with 3 other guys. That short changes the other 3. He IS tied for the int lead, but that is not what you posted. You posted the he WAS the int leader.
But before we all get to ahead of ourselves, it is WAY too early to start saying one player is head and shoulders above the rest. There is a lot of football yet to be played.
cberry
offline
offline
Originally posted by Lef Grebo
Originally posted by Cberry
Originally posted by Lef Grebo
Originally posted by Cberry
Originally posted by sting004
Not really. Face some of the top eastern teams first.
I'd like sabresandkane to do it since he's pretty unbiased in his reports. That goes a long way to me.
There's a difference between skill in the East and the West but it's not THAT big.
We have the INT leader in Footz Baller and we have Champ Berry who solidified himself last season as a play making king. I would think that's enough for evidence.
OK, let's get real here:
Interceptions
Player Int
footz Baller 4
Lester"The Molester" Hayes 4
Torch Johnson 4
Joe Rippa 4
footz is TIED for the lead with 3 other players....
Lets get real:
Does that not make him one of the INT leaders? Or does that automatically make him last? Am I missing something? None of those CBs at the top have an INT for a TD and that's usually the tie breaker for the alpha of the pack.
Or am I still missing something?
My point was you represented footz as THE int leader, when he was tied with 3 other guys. That short changes the other 3. He IS tied for the int lead, but that is not what you posted. You posted the he WAS the int leader.
But before we all get to ahead of ourselves, it is WAY too early to start saying one player is head and shoulders above the rest. There is a lot of football yet to be played.
If ones were thes footz baller would be the INT leader. So either way you say it or however you say it I'm still 100% correct.
Originally posted by Cberry
Originally posted by Lef Grebo
Originally posted by Cberry
Originally posted by sting004
Not really. Face some of the top eastern teams first.
I'd like sabresandkane to do it since he's pretty unbiased in his reports. That goes a long way to me.
There's a difference between skill in the East and the West but it's not THAT big.
We have the INT leader in Footz Baller and we have Champ Berry who solidified himself last season as a play making king. I would think that's enough for evidence.
OK, let's get real here:
Interceptions
Player Int
footz Baller 4
Lester"The Molester" Hayes 4
Torch Johnson 4
Joe Rippa 4
footz is TIED for the lead with 3 other players....
Lets get real:
Does that not make him one of the INT leaders? Or does that automatically make him last? Am I missing something? None of those CBs at the top have an INT for a TD and that's usually the tie breaker for the alpha of the pack.
Or am I still missing something?
My point was you represented footz as THE int leader, when he was tied with 3 other guys. That short changes the other 3. He IS tied for the int lead, but that is not what you posted. You posted the he WAS the int leader.
But before we all get to ahead of ourselves, it is WAY too early to start saying one player is head and shoulders above the rest. There is a lot of football yet to be played.
If ones were thes footz baller would be the INT leader. So either way you say it or however you say it I'm still 100% correct.
cberry
offline
offline
Originally posted by Warlock
Originally posted by Cberry
Originally posted by Warlock
After the last game of the season, a list of the top 5 performers per position should be made, then a small committee should vote on the top two (per position). If you want to take it a step farther, divide the lists into East and West (3 from each, but only 2 get voted in), this will give you the pro-bowl teams.
We'd just need a couple people to compile the lists. I did it for FBs last season and it took me like 30 mins (but then again that's a tough position to gather vital stats for... such as pancakes and broken tackles). OL need something more than pancakes as the only stat, so I'd suggest using the team's rushing/passing numbers as well.
Anyways, just an idea.
I'll unbiased-ly do it for CBs.
It's all about stats, can't really be biased (except in determining which stats are most important). I'd say that order of importance should be...
1A. Interceptions
1B. Interception return yardage
2. Pass deflections
3. Tackles
4A. Forced Fumbles
4B. Fumble Recoveries
4C. Fumble return yardage
5. Touchdowns
6. Sacks
7. Safeties
So I'd take the top 5 or 6 players with interceptions (if more than 5 or 6 are tied with the same number, start breaking it down by return yardage). Out of those 5 or 6, then break it down via pass deflections. Then break it down even further by tackles... etc...
So a list might look like...
CB#1 = 5 INTs (54 yds), 37 PD, 72 Tackles, 2 FF (1 FR for 3 yds), 1 Def TD, 2 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#2 = 5 INTs (43 yds), 40 PD, 68 Tackles, 1 FF (2 FR for 7 yds), 0 Def TD, 0 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#3 = 4 INTs (31 yds), 45 PD, 50 Tackles, 0 FF (1 FR for 1 yds), 0 Def TD, 1 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#4 = 4 INTs (31 yds), 32 PD, 61 Tackles, 1 FF (0 FR for 0 yds), 0 Def TD, 3 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#5 = 4 INTs (31 yds), 32 PD, 59 Tackles, 1 FF (3 FR for 9 yds), 0 Def TD, 0 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
Just an example, but big plays = recognition, typically. This is why I have a big importance for INTs.
I would say that we really only have two options for this concept...
A) Create the player pool based on statistics, which a committee then votes on.
B) Create the player pool based on popularity. We could have each team nominate it's 3-4 best players, then have a committee vote on their picks.
I believe the stats approach is much fairer, you have to be somewhere in the top of the league leaders page to even get into the pool. It's pretty much the approach I took for compiling the FB list... the top 5 FBs in rushing yardage were included, then I threw up a bunch of other important stats for a FB (like pancakes, YPC, TDs, etc...). Obviously FB is a kind of intangible position, but if you want recognition, you have to stand out among other FBs (I used rushing yardage as the primary measuring stick, because there's not many that were even on the top 50 rushing list).
Having each nominee submit a "best play" of the season highlight is a nice touch also IMHO.
Sounds like a good plan.
Originally posted by Cberry
Originally posted by Warlock
After the last game of the season, a list of the top 5 performers per position should be made, then a small committee should vote on the top two (per position). If you want to take it a step farther, divide the lists into East and West (3 from each, but only 2 get voted in), this will give you the pro-bowl teams.
We'd just need a couple people to compile the lists. I did it for FBs last season and it took me like 30 mins (but then again that's a tough position to gather vital stats for... such as pancakes and broken tackles). OL need something more than pancakes as the only stat, so I'd suggest using the team's rushing/passing numbers as well.
Anyways, just an idea.
I'll unbiased-ly do it for CBs.
It's all about stats, can't really be biased (except in determining which stats are most important). I'd say that order of importance should be...
1A. Interceptions
1B. Interception return yardage
2. Pass deflections
3. Tackles
4A. Forced Fumbles
4B. Fumble Recoveries
4C. Fumble return yardage
5. Touchdowns
6. Sacks
7. Safeties
So I'd take the top 5 or 6 players with interceptions (if more than 5 or 6 are tied with the same number, start breaking it down by return yardage). Out of those 5 or 6, then break it down via pass deflections. Then break it down even further by tackles... etc...
So a list might look like...
CB#1 = 5 INTs (54 yds), 37 PD, 72 Tackles, 2 FF (1 FR for 3 yds), 1 Def TD, 2 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#2 = 5 INTs (43 yds), 40 PD, 68 Tackles, 1 FF (2 FR for 7 yds), 0 Def TD, 0 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#3 = 4 INTs (31 yds), 45 PD, 50 Tackles, 0 FF (1 FR for 1 yds), 0 Def TD, 1 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#4 = 4 INTs (31 yds), 32 PD, 61 Tackles, 1 FF (0 FR for 0 yds), 0 Def TD, 3 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
CB#5 = 4 INTs (31 yds), 32 PD, 59 Tackles, 1 FF (3 FR for 9 yds), 0 Def TD, 0 Sacks, 0 Safeties.
Just an example, but big plays = recognition, typically. This is why I have a big importance for INTs.
I would say that we really only have two options for this concept...
A) Create the player pool based on statistics, which a committee then votes on.
B) Create the player pool based on popularity. We could have each team nominate it's 3-4 best players, then have a committee vote on their picks.
I believe the stats approach is much fairer, you have to be somewhere in the top of the league leaders page to even get into the pool. It's pretty much the approach I took for compiling the FB list... the top 5 FBs in rushing yardage were included, then I threw up a bunch of other important stats for a FB (like pancakes, YPC, TDs, etc...). Obviously FB is a kind of intangible position, but if you want recognition, you have to stand out among other FBs (I used rushing yardage as the primary measuring stick, because there's not many that were even on the top 50 rushing list).
Having each nominee submit a "best play" of the season highlight is a nice touch also IMHO.
Sounds like a good plan.
Warlock
offline
offline
Originally posted by shacky21
why would return yardage be more important than passes deflected? As long as they get the turnover, return yardage is gravy. I'll take a shutdown corner who bats alot of balls away and gets no picks before the corner who gets one lucky pick for a 99yd return.
The other problem with guaging CB's, is that if they always cover their man less balls get thrown their way. Less opporunity for picks, deflections, and tackles.
Because we live in a sensationalist society, where big plays are remembered more than the intangibles. Personally, I agree with you, but unfortunately I'd wager that we're in the minority.
Besides, I doubt anyone is going to go through the effort of watching every player's game film to properly gauge their exceptional play. You have to start somewhere, INTs looked like a fair place.
why would return yardage be more important than passes deflected? As long as they get the turnover, return yardage is gravy. I'll take a shutdown corner who bats alot of balls away and gets no picks before the corner who gets one lucky pick for a 99yd return.
The other problem with guaging CB's, is that if they always cover their man less balls get thrown their way. Less opporunity for picks, deflections, and tackles.
Because we live in a sensationalist society, where big plays are remembered more than the intangibles. Personally, I agree with you, but unfortunately I'd wager that we're in the minority.
Besides, I doubt anyone is going to go through the effort of watching every player's game film to properly gauge their exceptional play. You have to start somewhere, INTs looked like a fair place.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
