Fascinating, cutting edge stuff.
The only issue I see is with this being made public, i.e. if I play for the Bucks and I'm a known sulker when things go poorly, I may deliberately change my countenance knowing that a guy that has my boss' ear is tracking my facial expressions.
That said, it's yet another way to analyze contributions to team performance and I applaud it.
Why would a fan of any team 'worry' about an opponent? If my team wins, yay, and if they lose, bummer. But I certainly won't be 'worrying' about any of their tilts. Let me guess, you are from Saugus, no wait, Braintree.
Watkins is a stud. It's not every day that you get a chance to collect a player of his caliber. Who cares what they paid?
According to most here the Bills have blown their first round picks for the past ten years. Why would they suddenly expect next year's first rounder to be a surefire thing? In 2009 that first and fourth was Aaron Maybin and Shawn Nelson. In 2010 it was Spiller and Easley.
It boggles the mind.
If you could trade Aaron Maybin and Shawn Nelson right now for Watkins would you do it?
What's my issue? You don't see the slippery slope?
Player X gets injured and uses HGH to recover and comes back bigger, faster, and stronger than ever. This advantage causes him to beat out player Y for player Y's previously held spot. Player Y is well aware of Player X's use of HGH to recover from his injury and attributes Player X's use of said hormone to the loss of Player Y's job. Suddenly Player Y gets an "injury" that requires HGH to recover from.
Dude, the entire league will be on HGH in less than a year. How do you not see that?
A win here would be huge, because after this week, which admittedly is dicey, there are seven wins in a row sitting there for the taking.
Look at the sked. If Orton can simply be average, there isn't a game between 10/12 and 11/30 that could be considered an automatic loss.
So your position is that we need a top 10 QB to be a SB contender. Fair enough.
Manuel may never be that, only time will tell. However, it's clear the kid is getting better. Let's see how his game evolves over the course of the year before we rush to judgement.
Regressing from the improvements he has made this year or regressing from the below average standard he set last year?
Posit for a moment, if you will, that EJ's next two games are below average. Would you consider that to be identifiable proof of regression from this year's standard that he has set in games 1 and 2, or some other papazoidian standard that you arbitrarily set? What is the benchmark for regression?