Rocky Landing

My impression of him is that he is a businessman, and while I am certainly glad he is the new owner, I don't hold to this vaunted opinion of him. He would be crazy to tell his HC, going into week 8, that he was on the bubble. But, even if he did say it, and even if he meant it, his opinion could surely change as quick as TBD's collective, fickle opinion should we go 6-10, yet again.

I have a feeling that this game will get away from one team, or the other. Geno has a great day. Rex/Mornhinweg out-coaches us. Their defense plays like rabid, cornered animals. Our run game falters. Orton gets sacked six times. Glenn's arms fall off. --OR-- Geno craps the bed. Dixon/Brown exceed expectations. Orton to Watkins/Woods/Hogan/Chandler/etc. We shut down their run game. Jets fans boo. Whoever wins does so by a significant margin.

What's your definition of "exact?"

I'm not really sure. But, if he did, how much would that be worth? It's early in the season.

Assuming that Rex Ryan is fired at the end of the season, should the Bills consider him for head coach?

I don't think that's really the point. A GM must always consider all the risks vs. rewards in a given trade, and the possibility of a Watkins injury is more significant in terms of risk when you are assessing whether that one player is worth the three players you would have acquired otherwise.

The entire premise of this thread is a straw-man argument. And, the ensuing debate seems to go along with some bizarre assumption that the primary value of a first round draft pick is for the purpose of drafting a "franchise quarterback." Since when? Our disfunction at qb contributed to the risk of paying such a high price for Watkins in other ways. EJ's inaccuracy lowered Watkins value on the field. I don't believe the main concern in Watkins high price was that "now we don't get to draft a franchise qb in the first round in 2015." Especially since we were so "all in on EJ" at the time. The question was, and still is: was Watkins worth our 9th pick (Ebron, apparently), 4th round pick, and whomever we would have drafted in the first round in 2015 (whichever position that might be) combined. It wasn't a low-risk move. But, considering Ebrons so-far underwhelming rookie season, and how good Watkins is proving to be, I think most of us, at this point, think it was worth it.

This is true, of course. But, it's also true that LA-- especially Downtown LA-- is not the same city it was twenty years ago. I've been here since '91, and for decades they were talking about "revitalizing downtown." And, it was a joke for decades, but it has now happened. Staples Center has been enormously successful. Silverlake, Los Feliz, Echo Park (home of the famous Rampart precinct), have all gentrified. Even the downtown loft district is unrecognizable from when I lived there in the 90s. $80,000 cars parked on the street an no homeless population to speak of. There were entire homeless communities when I was there. Los Angeles will have an NFL team. I just hope it isn't the Raiders.

I believe that if either the Rams, or the Raiders were to plan a move to L.A. they would get unanimous support.

I certainly wouldn't say that the refs were biased against us-- we got away with a few things, too. But, I know what you are saying. I thought the Hogan fumble was BS, also. It sure looked to me like his knees were on the ground before the ball came out, but not enough there to overturn the call on the field. Really, to me the officiating all season has looked inconsistent as hell. Anyone else feel this way?

One of the better threads in recent memory.

Percy Harvin is going to have Geno throwing to him in a system he has just stepped into. I like our chances of shutting him down. If he thought Seattle was frustrating...

Isn't Kouandjio the guy Marrone referred to as "Venus de Milo?"

Balance? You can't use numbers that subjectively and call them "stats."

Honestly, I think the passer rating differential is a bit silly. The passer rating quantifies completions per attempt, yards per attempt, touchdowns, and turnovers. It's not that far from saying: "the team that scores the most points wins--100% of the time!" Of course the teams with the highest differential in these four categories will be the teams to make it to the Super Bowl. But that isn't predictive. It is a statistic that gains meaning as the season progresses. I would suspect (and I haven't looked at this) that a strong team in a weak division would have a higher differential than one coming out of a tough division. And, at this point, at the beginning of the post season, is the passer rating differential more useful than looking at those four categories (completions, yards, touchdowns, and turnovers) separately? That being said, the passer rating differential does do one thing that the passer rating itself completely ignores: the performance of the opposing team (as well as the performance of the subject team, for that matter). But, that really means that the passer rating is more of a comparative stat between team performances, and less of an indicator of QB talent.

You're unwittingly disproving your own point with this illustration. The formula for the passer rating is: [(a + b + c + d)/6] x 100, whereas a = [(completions/attempts x 100) – 30] x 0.05; b = [(yards/att) – 3] x 0.25; c = (TD/att) x 20; and d = 2.375 – (interceptions/att x 25). What’s missing from this equation? A: any variables that include the performance of any other player on the field other than the quarterback. So, if a QB has no offensive line to speak of and is only given an average of 1.6 seconds to get rid of the ball before being sacked, their rating will be low. Or, if a QB is playing a superior defense, their rating will be lower. If the QB has great receivers matched up with a poor secondary, their rating will be higher. That is why Orton, a fairly mediocre QB, can have that high a rating vs. a suspect Patriots defense. It's why Aaron Rodgers, arguably one of the most consistent QBs in the league can have a 151.2 rating vs. the Bears, and a 99.7 against the Dolphins. And it utterly explains what you refer to as "outliers." There is no such thing as an outlier regarding the quarterback rating. There are no published p-values, critical values, significance levels, or confidence intervals for the passer rating. Why? A: because it is statistically meaningless; it has no use for statistical analysis.

I said it right before the game, and I'll say it here: Hogan is underrated on these boards. He had a great game IMO, especially for someone who has gotten as few snaps as him. CJ should be benched. But, it's not all on him. If an RB on our team can't move the pile, or run through a defender that's a good 75lbs heavier, they don't have a chance. Still-- bench Spiller. Fred was not himself today. Ankle? Illness"? Combination of the two? Yet, he still rocked. Such an important player to our team. Today, we were out-coached.

I wonder what input Orton might have had in sitting Williams? Hogan was targeted twice last week with two receptions. I think those were his first two of the season. In fact, I'm not sure if he was even on the field on offense until last week? IMO, Hogan continues to be underrated on these boards. There, I said it. If Orton has good chemistry with Hogan, great. And, so far, I have been underwhelmed by Williams. He's got a great highlight reel with other teams. But, I don't think he would have made that downfield catch Goodwin made last week. Everyone talks about how Williams is a big redone threat. But, I don't think our ineffectiveness in the redone is was for a lack of receiver talent.

To the OP: I LOVE this kind of analysis. You have done some remarkable things, and you clearly have some time on your hands. But, you have certainly put a lot of time and creativity into this. Between your analysis, and Bill from NYC's "A Few Thoughts About the Game in No Particular Order," (and, of course, the subsequent discussions) TBD has become my first place to go for game analysis. I have to strongly disagree with this, and your criticism of the OP's methodology. In fact, I think that with his methodology, someone with an advanced understanding of statistics could, over the course of a season, estimate critical values, and/or P-values and confidence intervals that would establish a reasonable margin of error. (Something that you will never see with something as statistically meaningless at the passer rating.) I suspect this because the OP's general conclusions, based on his analysis, are fairly substantiated by what most of us (EJ fanatics notwithstanding) saw in the difference between EJ's play, and that of Orton. I'm not saying that your criticism isn't valid. But, you seem to be assuming the null hypothesis regardless of data. In many statistical models, assumptions are made first, and then the data is used either to prove the null hypothesis, or rule out the null hypothesis, depending on the methodology. And, while there certainly isn't (as far as I know) enough data to effectively apply these models, who cares? It passes the smell test, IMHO. The OP has managed to develop a methodology that actually takes into account other players on the field (again, unlike the passer rating). I think that is very useful indeed, insofar as it provides a quantitative measurement of what we see on the field, and our impressions from game to game. I understand what you are saying about accuracy (and I suspect that Big Cat's "75%" comment was merely off the cuff), but just because there isn't enough data to estimate something like a margin of error, or a significance level doesn't make the data useless. Were that the case, no one would talk about the passer rating ever.

I think that rather than a caption, someone should photoshop a dildo in each hand. ...did I really just write that??? Maybe I should delete this post!...

Just finished watching the game (had a busy day), so it just ended for me. As exciting as a defensive game gets. Regarding the (what seems to me) mystifying EJ vs. Orton debate: How anyone could have watched this season's five games and think that they are even remotely equal is beyond me. Orton has a better arm, is more accurate, more decisive, can throw deep, sees the field, sees his open receivers,... what's left? I suppose EJ can scramble/run better, although I cringed every time he did. Watkins. Wow. I believe that Fred Jackson might be my all-time favorite Bill. He was a leader today, and every game. He makes me proud to be a Bills fan. Why does Hackett EVER have Spiller run up the middle? I have more hope for the season now, than I have all year.

Worth noting: We are not only still on top of the division, we are also the only team in our division with positive net points.

Plus, you know, Benghazi...

I have a hard time believing that this is what is going to bring down Goodell. If Ray Rice is still news (beyond NFL.com, ESPN, etc.) then maybe. But, I just don't think this story has the legs, nor do I see it really affecting anyone's bottom line.

Here's the thing: One week is a long time as far as the public's attention span is concerned. And, this is just one more media-storm for Goodell, and the NFL to weather. This time next year, it will have as much poignancy as Junior Seau being driven to suicide by the after-effects of a career full of concussions. Or, Michael Vick's dogfighting. Or the travails of Tim Tebow, and the religion he insisted on wearing on his sleeve. The media LOVES a good, sensational story, and had Ray Rice not appeared in a particularly dramatic video, his domestic abuse issues would be gone by the end of his two game suspension. Petersen's biggest crime (as far as the NFL is concerned) was bad timing. But even Ray Rice's grizzly cameo can only get played so many times before it becomes inconsequential. And, I suspect its legs have just about run themselves out. I think this is absolutely right. There is NOTHING more important to the NFL, or its sponsors, than the bottom line. The hand-wringing, and posturing, and lip-service is a necessary component to a well-rounded, public relations strategy. Everyone sitting in their respective boardrooms understands this.