Wraith

So, according to this rumor, Buffalo would have to build a new stadium and sell it out for 5 consecutive years in order to receive an expansion franchise. . . . So if they only sell out 49/50 games during that time period, would the NFL force the new franchise to move or would they travel back in time, stop the expansion from ever happening, and thus retroactively remove any memory of the team from our collective minds? If Ashton Kutcher has taught us anything, it's that messing around with history like that can be dangerous.

Very cool, thanks.

I am a 24 year old beginner - early intermediate level skier who has skied Bristol Mountain maybe 4 times in the last two years (first time out this year was Saturday). I'm at the point in my ski career where I'm pretty comfortable on the intermediate difficulty (blue squares?) and can handle some black diamonds with fresh legs and patience. My fiance is my teacher and she's an experienced skier who owns her own equipment. I'm at the point now where, due to the frequency with which we've been skiing, I've been thinking about buying the equipment instead of renting. For my skill level, what would I expect to pay for skis, boots, bindings, poles, etc.? Any suggestions on when and where to buy in the Rochester area? I have yet to find an informative resource on the internet that I really like, so if you could point me in the right direction....

You really do have a knack for selective statistics. Brady's overall rating downfield (10+ yards) was an 81 in 2004. Not all that great, but certainly not as bad as you try to portray. But hell, I was trying to argue your side, until you started this crap.

I would think twice before making any claims based on a study that only considers completion percentage on balls thrown 40+ yards from two years ago. The fact of the matter is that although 2004 was Brady's best year throwing downfield, his downfield performance degraded in both 2005 and now 2006. In addition, it's impossible to claim where Brady stood relative to other QBs in 2004 based on that study, as it totally omitts passes thrown between 10 and 40 yards, where about 95% of all "downfield" throws occur.

What?!?!?!? Where did I say he was supposed to tell the jury? The jury did their job. The DA should never have brought the case to trial in the first place, or at the very least, dropped the sentence after the law was changed.

Information regarding sentencing and punishment is withheld from the jury as to prevent that information from influencing the jury.

Holy crap, did you even read the article? The jury did not know this crime was a felony. They did exactly as they were supposed to do, convict him guilty of receiving oral sex from a class mate. When they found out it was a mandatory 10 year sentence, the Foreman actually shrieked out loud.

I'm not surprised that reading comprehension is NOT among your "many" skills. 1) Where did I say the LAW is racist, or in anyway motivated by race? My exact words were "horribly outdated." 2) Again, where did I say RACIST government? Dumb a**. 3) The story said they offered FIVE: "Of course, the plea was the same five years he'd offered before the trial -- not taking into account the rape acquittal. Barker thinks five years is fair for receiving oral sex from a schoolmate." 4) Possibly, but where's your proof? Either way, how does that make me a "!@#$ing moron?" My exact words were: "The District Attorney is on an ego trip, apparently offended that the defendant dare to not take the offered plea bargain, and almost certainly motivated by race, gender, or class." Do I have to define the word GENDER to you? 5) Those with common sense or at least a shred of reason. The DA's argument was: "We can set aside his sentence," Barker says. "Legally, it's still possible for us to set aside his sentence and give him a new sentence to a lesser charge. But it's up to us. He has no control over it." The position of Barker and the district attorney, McDade, who refused to comment, is that Wilson is guilty under the law and there is no room for mercy, though the facts seem to say they simply chose not to give it to Wilson." Guess what, that's not the law anymore. They changed the law. Why did they change it? BECAUSE OF THIS CASE YOU MORON!. So overturn the conviction. Apply some reason.

It was on tape.

The only idiot here is you. The facts: 1) The law was horribly outdated. If the same two people had intercourse, it would have been a misdemeanor. This case was a felony. 2) As a direct result of this case, the state governement realized their own idiocy and changed the law, but failed to apply it retroactively. 3) The district attorney offered a plea bargain that included 5 years of jail time and being on the registry as a sex offender. 4) A white, female teacher was sentenced to 90 days jail time during the same time frame for having a sexual relationship with a student. That is 1/20th the jail time. 5 PERCENT. 5) The district attorney has the power to end this at any time, but hasn't because the defendant should've just "taken his medicine" (...and the 5 years of jail time and permanent branding as a sex offender that goes along with the medicine). The District Attorney is on an ego trip, apparently offended that the defendant dare to not take the offered plea bargain, and almost certainly motivated by race, gender, or class.

Re-read that post you're quoting. According to the author, this has nothing to do with the "tag."

Well, historically, he has been good in that region, I think. But not this year. Let me see if I can put together his numbers for that region for the last five years. From 2001 to 2005 (2006 excluded), Tom Brady's numbers 11 - 20 yards down field are 285/529 (54%), 5283 Yards (9.99 Yards/Attempt), 26 TD, and 16 Int, for a rating of 92.37. That's pretty decent I think. Definitely different from what he put up this year.

It does seem that way in general, but this year that certainly wasn't the case. Passing between 11-20 yards this year, Brady went 34/81 (42%) for 635 yards (7.84 yard/attempt), 2 TD, and 3 Int, for an overall passer rating of 62.53.

First off, I refuse to believe Tom Brady would throw deep at the same rate as Peyton Manning if Brady was always throwing to covered receivers and Manning was always throwing to open ones. That implies that Tom Brady either A) Can't recognize when a receiver more than ten yards down field is "open," or B) Sees a whole hell of a lot of value in throwing to covered receivers to "stretch the defense." There is always value in a taking a few shots down field to open things up underneath. But why in the world would you throw down field at the same rate as the best vertical passing offense in the league (the Colts) if your receivers SUCKED at it? Secondly, by down field passing, we're talking about anything over TEN yards. I'm not talking 30+ yards here. The VAST majority of the throws made in the down field range are between 10 - 20 yards down field. These aren't "stretch the field" passes. In that range, the running backs and especially the tight ends are still viable options.

The point I was trying to make here is that the short passes aren't by definition easier to catch. The majority of short passes, even by Tom Brady, happen 0 - 10 yards downfield. They are almost always made in front of linebackers waiting to deliver a hit, are almost always thrown HARD to squeeze them in between defenders, and are often times TIMING routes. I'm just questioning the assumption that a bad WR will do better with short throws than long throws.

Now that is a good point. Fortunately they keep stats for that, too. I'm doubtful that separating out the stats by indoors/outdoors will have much effect, though, because the most overwhelming range of passes included in the "down field passing" is the 10 to 20 yard pass, which is not effected by the weather nearly as much as longer throws. These longer throws happen so infrequently as to have little effect compared to the 10 to 20 yard pass. In addition, I feel a quarterback as smart as Tom Brady will throw down field less frequently when it's windy/rainy/snowy, so his numbers will not be impacted much.

Wrong. If your implication is that NE's scrub wide receivers cannot get open deep while Indianapolis's can, Tom Brady would NOT be throwing deep at NEARLY THE EXACT SAME RATE as Peyton Manning. If the implication is that NE's scrub wide receivers are dropping the deep balls 11% of the time MORE than Indianapolis's are, why are the short passes in traffic not getting dropped at the same rate? Either way, you are reaching.

Some other interesting facts I learned while running the numbers: Tom Brady went the first two years of his starting career without completing a pass over 40 yards (0 for 14). For reference, Losman completed 3 this year in fewer attempts (3 for 10). Brady had the worst down field passing year of his career since 2002. He only threw past 10 yards 28% of the time while earning a 66 passer rating. Of the top 15 QBs in 2006, the lowest percentage of downfield passes was held by David Carr at 17.46%. For reference, the next closest QB in the top 15 was Drew Brees at 26.85% Tom Brady's percentage of 27.91 put him at 11th out of the top 15. Interestingly enough, Drew Brees and Steve McNair threw downfield even less while Chad Pennington threw down field MORE. J.P. Losman's downfield percentage of 29.60% put him at #9 out of the top 15. This was almost double the frequency with which Kelly Holcomb threw down field in 2005 (15.54%).

After looking at the numbers over a five year period, I am convinced that it is not a scheme issue, or a "who is better" issue, at all. The facts of the matter are that Manning and Brady throw "down field" at almost the same rate. Manning is just MUCH better at it. First a definition, then some numbers: "Down field passing" is defined as passes thrown more than 10 yards IN THE AIR. All other passes are "short." _________________TD___INT___COMP/ATT___RATING___PCT of Passes P.Manning_Short___83____35______0.73_______92.54______64.29% T.Brady___Short___86____29______0.72_______94.59______66.52% _________________TD___INT___COMP/ATT___RATING___PCT of Passes P.Manning_Long___105____45______0.54______112.14______35.71% T.Brady___Long____54____45______0.43_______77.13______33.48% As you can see, Manning and Brady both throw short about 65% of the time and long about 35% of the time. They have nearly identical short passing numbers across the board, in fact. When throwing long though, similarities evaporate. Manning has nearly double the amount of touchdowns while throwing the same amount of intereceptions, has a completion percentage 11 percentage points higher, leading to an overall QB rating of 112.14 (Which is spectacular) while Brady has a mediocre 77.13. So what does it all mean? I have no idea. All the numbers tell us is that Manning is a much better down field passer than Brady. Any conclusions about who contributes more to their offense is unfounded. It does make the mind wonder, though. Certainly, you wonder if Brady's inability to pass beyond ten yards down field is a major reason why all his "game winning" drives ended with long field goals, and when he finally needed to get all the way down the field (as opposed to coming up 35 yards short) he simply couldn't muster up a vertical passing game.

Now these are the kind of topics I can dig my teeth into. Great work, very well-reasoned, very well-written. You've made me want to start going through some of those numbers myself!

Best NFL game I've seen in quite some time. So happy it happened the way it did. Not only did the Patriots lose, but they do it such assinine fashion. Blowing an 18 point lead, letting the Colts run an extra minute off the clock after the 2:00 minute warning, and then Brady throwing the interception in the clutch. Gosh, Tom, life sucks when you actually have to get it into the end zone to win a game, doesn't it? No field goals this time.

This thread is freakin' hilarious to read. How's the foot taste, guys?

Please point out where any one is getting upset about these people being hung and losing their heads? Congratulations, you are now at the stage where you are making things up to get angry about.

Sundays games featured what has to be the single worse collective performance by a group of wide receivers I have ever seen. For Seattle, Darrel Jackson was true to form with his drops, but now the formerly reliable Deon Branch is getting in on the act. Does Hasselbach throw with greasy hands or does Seattle just have the worst receivers coach in the history of the NFL? The most irritating play I saw out of that group was when Hasselback was flushed from the pocket late in the game and was forced to roll to his right. He has time to look downfield but has literally nobody to throw to because both receivers ran themselves out of bounds! Then San Diego takes the field and raises WR suckiness to a new level. Holy . Eric Parker apparently lost the full use of his arms, leaving him flailing around at passes AND punts he dropped. Vincent Jackson showed absolutely no effort to get his feet down in the back of the end zone, and then followed it up with two horrendous drops where he apparently was afraid of getting hit by a NE DB half his size. It was pathetic.