phthalatemagic
Footballguy
That's hosted by washingtonpost I think? Does anyone have that link? I lost it. Thanks!
Did you guys ever adjust yours to reflect true target / catch %?You know, eliminate obvious non targets such as throw aways by QB's when under pressure that were in the area of a WR & then adjust the target / catch % accordingly.You might find that you like ours just as much or more.
Great work...just wish you would work out the Firefox compatibility issues. I hate that I have to use IE to look at some of your websites this year. Last year I didn't have that problem.You might find that you like ours just as much or more.
What can't you see with Firefox? I use it and haven't had any problems.Great work...just wish you would work out the Firefox compatibility issues. I hate that I have to use IE to look at some of your websites this year. Last year I didn't have that problem.You might find that you like ours just as much or more.
I believe, and Doug will hopefully correct me if I'm wrong, that our target numbers come from the game recaps and adjust for thrown away balls, penalties, etc.Did you guys ever adjust yours to reflect true target / catch %?You know, eliminate obvious non targets such as throw aways by QB's when under pressure that were in the area of a WR & then adjust the target / catch % accordingly.You might find that you like ours just as much or more.
If you guys would do that, you'd set yourselves apart from the rest & have a real winner on your hands. Otherwise, except for the window dressing, you're just showing the same stats as everyone else.![]()
Screen ShotHere is the screenshot. I have this problem (ads cover text and jarble text) on many of the pages at FBGs when I use Fire Fox.Anthony Borbely said:What can't you see with Firefox? I use it and haven't had any problems.
Same here. I only use Firefox and it works great for me. All pages at Footballguys do. I think it might be on your end Till.Anthony Borbely said:What can't you see with Firefox? I use it and haven't had any problems.Tillmanisahero said:Great work...just wish you would work out the Firefox compatibility issues. I hate that I have to use IE to look at some of your websites this year. Last year I didn't have that problem.You might find that you like ours just as much or more.
Go here and post your problem, and it will help to post the image you posted in the shark pool. Hopefully the computer gurus can help you out. Good luck.Screen ShotHere is the screenshot. I have this problem (ads cover text and jarble text) on many of the pages at FBGs when I use Fire Fox.Anthony Borbely said:What can't you see with Firefox? I use it and haven't had any problems.
Also...it doesn't matter what I set the text size at.
Do you have firefox minimized and/or do you have a widget or something that would restrict it's size?If I'm not mistaken, the page is a smidge off when not 100% the width of the monitor. Just a smidgeScreen ShotHere is the screenshot. I have this problem (ads cover text and jarble text) on many of the pages at FBGs when I use Fire Fox.Anthony Borbely said:What can't you see with Firefox? I use it and haven't had any problems.
Also...it doesn't matter what I set the text size at.
Yes, sadly.Chris Chambers MIA 38.3
Is that correct?
Hey Jene,I suggested to Joe last year that you guys might want to do that & he said while you guys currently don't, it was something he'd look into for this year.I believe, and Doug will hopefully correct me if I'm wrong, that our target numbers come from the game recaps and adjust for thrown away balls, penalties, etc.Did you guys ever adjust yours to reflect true target / catch %?You know, eliminate obvious non targets such as throw aways by QB's when under pressure that were in the area of a WR & then adjust the target / catch % accordingly.You might find that you like ours just as much or more.
If you guys would do that, you'd set yourselves apart from the rest & have a real winner on your hands. Otherwise, except for the window dressing, you're just showing the same stats as everyone else.![]()
Good enough. I understand the issue with penalties. If you're looking for a reception/target percentage, it's not helpful. It may make a small difference in the total target numbers that would be worth considering.I based my original response from a old 2005 post in our staff discussion room and may have misread it. I know that our recappers make their own determination of targets, just wasn't sure which number was transferred to the database. Data entry may be the issue there, but I'm again talking out of turn.Hey Jene,I suggested to Joe last year that you guys might want to do that & he said while you guys currently don't, it was something he'd look into for this year.I believe, and Doug will hopefully correct me if I'm wrong, that our target numbers come from the game recaps and adjust for thrown away balls, penalties, etc.Did you guys ever adjust yours to reflect true target / catch %?You know, eliminate obvious non targets such as throw aways by QB's when under pressure that were in the area of a WR & then adjust the target / catch % accordingly.You might find that you like ours just as much or more.
If you guys would do that, you'd set yourselves apart from the rest & have a real winner on your hands. Otherwise, except for the window dressing, you're just showing the same stats as everyone else.![]()
Just as an FYI, penalties automatically wipe out plays & any resulting stats.
Anyway I was just wondering if Joe had decided to try implementing true target / reception % this year?
I know it would be extra work, but it would really put you guys on a whole other level, compared to what everyone else is doing.
Good thought, Bri. When I narrow down my Firefox window, though, I get a horizontal scrollbar rather than squeezing the content.Tilllmanisahero > Based on the screenshot it looks like you're running Firefox on Windows XP. Which version of Firefox are you running? (You can find it on the "Help" menu by clicking on "About Mozilla Firefox". I'm on 2.0.0.5)Do you have firefox minimized and/or do you have a widget or something that would restrict it's size?If I'm not mistaken, the page is a smidge off when not 100% the width of the monitor. Just a smidgeScreen ShotHere is the screenshot. I have this problem (ads cover text and jarble text) on many of the pages at FBGs when I use Fire Fox.Anthony Borbely said:What can't you see with Firefox? I use it and haven't had any problems.
Also...it doesn't matter what I set the text size at.
Hey Jene,I think you might have misunderstood me on the penalties thing.Good enough. I understand the issue with penalties. If you're looking for a reception/target percentage, it's not helpful. It may make a small difference in the total target numbers that would be worth considering.I based my original response from a old 2005 post in our staff discussion room and may have misread it. I know that our recappers make their own determination of targets, just wasn't sure which number was transferred to the database. Data entry may be the issue there, but I'm again talking out of turn.Hey Jene,I suggested to Joe last year that you guys might want to do that & he said while you guys currently don't, it was something he'd look into for this year.I believe, and Doug will hopefully correct me if I'm wrong, that our target numbers come from the game recaps and adjust for thrown away balls, penalties, etc.Did you guys ever adjust yours to reflect true target / catch %?You know, eliminate obvious non targets such as throw aways by QB's when under pressure that were in the area of a WR & then adjust the target / catch % accordingly.You might find that you like ours just as much or more.
If you guys would do that, you'd set yourselves apart from the rest & have a real winner on your hands. Otherwise, except for the window dressing, you're just showing the same stats as everyone else.![]()
Just as an FYI, penalties automatically wipe out plays & any resulting stats.
Anyway I was just wondering if Joe had decided to try implementing true target / reception % this year?
I know it would be extra work, but it would really put you guys on a whole other level, compared to what everyone else is doing.
Same version for me 2.0.0.5Good thought, Bri. When I narrow down my Firefox window, though, I get a horizontal scrollbar rather than squeezing the content.Tilllmanisahero > Based on the screenshot it looks like you're running Firefox on Windows XP. Which version of Firefox are you running? (You can find it on the "Help" menu by clicking on "About Mozilla Firefox". I'm on 2.0.0.5)Do you have firefox minimized and/or do you have a widget or something that would restrict it's size?If I'm not mistaken, the page is a smidge off when not 100% the width of the monitor. Just a smidgeScreen ShotHere is the screenshot. I have this problem (ads cover text and jarble text) on many of the pages at FBGs when I use Fire Fox.Anthony Borbely said:What can't you see with Firefox? I use it and haven't had any problems.
Also...it doesn't matter what I set the text size at.
Tillmanisahero, try this:1. hold the Ctrl key2. run your mousewheel upward two clicks. (EDIT: maybe three)
Nope..didn't work. Thanks for the tryTillmanisahero, try this:1. hold the Ctrl key2. run your mousewheel upward two clicks. (EDIT: maybe three)
Hey Jene,
I think you might have misunderstood me on the penalties thing.
Those plays never happened so they're never in the stats.
You never see a pick thrown by a QB that was called back by penalty as a stat.
You never see pass attempt, completion or yardage for a QB on a play that was called back by penalty.
You never see a rushing attempt or yardage for a RB on a play that was called back by penalty.
You never see a sack credited to a defender on a play that was called back by penalty.
You never see a reception or yardage for a WR on a play that is called back by penalty.
...etc...etc...etc...
I'd be very surprised if ya'lls target / reception % included such non plays. But I don't think ya'll do, as your numbers are in line with everyone else's.
My point was more for say when the QB is still in the pocket & will get called for intentional grounding unless he throws it away in the general vicinity of an eligible receiver. The QB throws a clear & obviously uncatchable ball, yet the stats everyone goes off show it as a target to the receiver that he did not catch.
Going even deeper are the targets to a WR that are clearly under thrown (skipping off the turf 10' shy of the WR) or over thrown (15' too high) etc... & the WR has no chance at that pass, yet the pass is still counted as a target to that the WR, which he did not catch.
That was more what I meant by asking if you guys were going to show a WR's true target / reception % this year.
As I said, I know Joe & me talked about it last year & he said it was something he'd look into, but was a little leery as he thought it might be too subjective.
Anyway, I was just curious if ya'll had decided to try it this year?
And don't get me wrong Jene, FBG's stuff is great as is. Love having everything at my fingertips. Just something that I think would only further seperate you guys from rest of the fanatsy football sites out there (like ya'll aren't already head & shoulders above everyone else).![]()
American by birth, Southern by the grace of God.tomarken said:(I kid.)