Kemp

The theory of relativity was based on a gut feeling, not analysis of data? Analytics don't answer every question. They lead you down a path of logic. You might want to read https://www.amazon.com/Undoing-Project-Friendship-Changed-Minds/dp/0393254593. It explains how what we think we know is often wrong. Besides being informative, It's a great read, too.

When all is said and done, the Stormy Daniels saga will be an afterthought.

A large number or amount. Which NFL QBs are decidedly more accurate than they were in college?

I wrote this: "I'm not just talking about his abysmal completion percentage". Then you tell me I don't understand it's beyond completion percentage. But I don't understand it. I previously posted the most comprehensive analytical breakdown on this year's QB class: https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2018/4/24/17271686/josh-allen-nfl-draft-2018-stats-analysis-comparisons. If you believe gut will be as successful as analytics, it's you that has not a clear understanding of analytics.

Yes, statistics are for nerds. Gut feelings are for big, strong men. "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. " - Albert Einstein

When you're saying one side is being consistently deceitful and the other side is Trump and his propensity to lie every single day (that is verifiable fact, not an opinion) it's difficult to take the rest of this seriously. Until the investigation is complete, we can't be certain of much, other than some involved have already pleaded guilty to various crimes. So far we know this about Manafort's supposed role in all of the this: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/10/report-former-trump-chair-paul-manafort-and-partner-told-to-surrender/544331/. Why the desire from some to shut it down if there were no crimes committed? As to where this investigation may head, one need look no further than the Clinton investigation that concluded in an impeachment based on nothing related to the original investigation. We have watched this process before, but this time it's not fair to do it the same way? When one side opens a door, it shouldn't surprise when the other side uses the same door. Trump and his supporters claimed they wanted to drain the swamp, so let's proceed and see exactly what's in this swamp..

When has accuracy gotten a ton better from college to the NFL?i

Thanks for the links. Interesting stuff. I wonder if it's possible that Wentz isn't as good as currently believed. His team buzzed through the playoffs and won the Super Bowl without him and Foles put up better stats than Wentz under tougher circumstances. Since Foles had never shown this level of ability before, it at least makes me wonder if Wentz will have the career most assume he will have or the Eagles were just that good. Just a thought.

My fear is that the Bills were prone to select Allen because of his arm strength and because he has the "look" of the prototypical NFL QB, despite his college stats being mind-numbingly poor, and I'm not just talking about his abysmal completion percentage. This selection is a great example of gut feelings triumphing over analytics. No one knows how it will turn out, but my money will always go on analytics over gut feelings. I hope so much that gut feeling win this time, because if it doesn't, the Bills just set themselves back another couple of seasons.

Remember what The Federalist used to say about Trump? http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/24/10-things-trump-said-but-says-he-didnt/

I had not heard that. Do you have a link concerning this?

Keep proving my point.

Yeah, I know it's a waste of time, but much like our caped crusader strives to eliminate stupidity, I love to point out pomposity. Now you choose to engage instead of ignoring. It's a tad ironic, but it doesn't matter. We all have the right to write whatever we want here, pending the decisions of the moderators.

Your first sentence in this particular post is nonsense, but so what, you seem to be enjoying yourself. Anyway, even if you had a point to make, it's lost in your self-generated haze of pomposity. Do you always go out of your way to make people dislike you or this all about creating an online persona for yourself?

lurch - make an abrupt, unsteady, uncontrolled movement or series of movements; stagger. A stagger can be a slow lurch. Thank God you're here to save us from the ignorance that surrounds us.

Mayfield will be a Top 10 QB. Allen will end up a backup, somewhere. The others?

Your point would be valid if that was the only stat cited in the linked article. It makes me wonder if you read it, because there are many different kinds of stats cited.

Some of the many interesting stats:

I know that statistics don't lie and can't be fudged. Only opinions can. I have zero authority on the matter, but anyone who looks at the stats I linked to and believes math is no longer a science, just doesn't understand reality. Allen could turn out to be the exception to the rule, but that doesn't change the fact that the rule exists and it has proven to be very reliable as a predictor of success. Those who attacked me as a troll are missing the point. It's not my opinion that he is unlikely to work out. It's the "opinion" of mathematics. If that makes people angry or upset with me is unimportant to me. Your gripe is with math. It's amazing to me that anyone can read that article and be confident on how this will play out well. I also realize that at least some of those who ridiculed the posted stats never read them, because it's a long and in-depth analysis, that some didn't have the time to read before dismissing it, so those folks are phonies. Like everyone else, I hope it's wrong on Allen, but experience teaches that the favorite comes in way more than the longshot.

I have no love or hate of Rosen. I had one desire for this draft. Just don't take Josh Allen. People are free to think I'm wrong, but no one can say that statistics don't make this look like an abominable pick. Cardale Jones had a good arm. How did that work out? Losman.... The list is never ending. Yeah, just like the guy who told us that Rudolph was going at 12. He's going to check back on that, too.

Well, we know it's not statistically-based. 3rd option that it could be based upon?

Quite the opposite. Teams paying attention to analytics understand it's not about feelings, projections, and "upsides". Still waiting for someone to explain what gives him the most upside. Arm strength has failed as a barometer over and over.

The 73rd best college rated QB is unbelievably bad as a first-rounder.