Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Attention NFL:


SSOG

Recommended Posts

It matters in pro bowl balloting, and pro bowl balloting matters in contract negotiations.

If this number is significant enough to matter and doesn't already come up in contract negotiations, the guy needs a new agent.In any case, I have serious trouble giving stats for something that doesn't happen. Specifically, the guy DOESN'T CATCH the ball. I understand he was impeded from doing so, but its never a 100% certainty that the guy would have made the grab.
:confused:I agree with this. SSOG said in the original post that the QB threw a perfect pass and the WR ran the perfect route, but that is not necessarily true. I have seen plenty of PI calls where I doubted the ball would have been caught. And even if the WR is in perfect position to make the catch does not mean he makes the catch... we see drops all the time.Furthermore, this raises the question of where one would draw the line. For example, if a running back is tackled by a defender penalized for grabbing the facemask or a horsecollar tackle, does the RB deserve more yards? After all, he presumably would have gotten more yards if not for the illegal tackle... but how many more should he be given? And what about defensive holding? The WR may have still run a perfect route, and the QB may still have thrown a perfect pass that would have been caught, but the holding occurred prior to the pass... why should one of those result in passing/receiving yards and one not result in passing/receiving yards?
Link to post
Share on other sites

My perspective on this one is one of making stats better. The sole purpose of statistics is to describe what happened. That's the one and only reason for their existence. They don't alter or impact what happened, they simply describe and explain what happened after it happened, recording it for posterity. If a WR has 1000 receiving yards, then that means that the WR moved his team down the field 1000 yards over the course of the season. This is simply a result of improving a statistic so that it better describes the impact that the WR in question had. If a WR has 1000 yards receiving and 200 in interference penalties, then he DIDN'T move his team 1000 yards down the field... he moved his team 1200 yards down the field.

But the current statistics do describe what happened. Statistics are kept on penalty yards. In theory, every penalty that occurs could be the result of a play made by an opposing player... it is illogical to do this with some penalties and not others.

Attention NFL: Please start crediting WRs with interceptions, when the QB throws a perfect ball and it is tipped by the WR and then intercepted.

I agree with this one (I know gianmarco said it, too- a hearty :thumbup: to both of you). Logistically, it would be a bit more difficult because it would require a judgment call... but on the other hand, it would be easy to strictly word it so that there was no judgment involved. And even if it did require a judgment call, it's not like that'd be the worst thing in the world- there's already a judgment call involved on whether a QB being tackled behind the LoS is a sack or a tackle for a loss.
Well, aren't there already judgement calls made in football scoring? For example, a drop by a WR is a judgement call is it not? It certainly isn't the case that every pass a WR gets two hands on but doesn't catch should be ruled a drop, and I'm pretty sure it isn't... which implies a judgement call by an official scorer, not unlike the judgement calls made in baseball for errors.That said, there are other cases where interceptions are not really the QB's fault that don't fit this model, like when a ball is tipped by a DL at the line... when the QB is blindsided right when he throws the ball... when a WR runs the wrong route and the QB throws to the right spot... etc. If the QB still gets blamed for those, why not just stick with the easy method of crediting them with all of them, as has always been done?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy solution to make SSOG and the "purists" happy.New Stat -- Pass Interference Yardage. This way you can track which WR's are getting more of it without adultering the true yardage made by actual receptions.

IMO this would be better than SSOG's proposal, but still, why stop there? What if Vincent Jackson draws an offensive holding penalty or an illegal contact penalty and gains 5 yards for his team... why not credit him for those yards as well? And, given that some places track the first downs gained by a WR, it's more than just yardage, it's also first downs that have to be tracked and credited.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, no butter this time. :boxing: I believe penalties are not rewards to players for being fouled, and therefore should not be added to the players' stats line. Penalties are a deterrence to prevent illegal behavior. Spot fouls, in particular, are proportional to the amount of flagrancy involved. A PI call far downfield is more damaging than a PI call at the line of scrimmage, therefore more yardage is awarded. Statistics, on the other hand, are a measure of concrete performance. It doesn't matter if you didn't perform because a foul prevented you from the opportunity or if you just failed on your own. I know it's not a perfect analogy, but take walks in baseball. Heavy HR hitters would have more home runs if they were walked less. They don't deserve inflated statistics because they had fewer opportunities to hit the ball. (And yes, I know they do track walks.)I think the problem arises because we really want to use those stats to determine "who's better", and in turn predict which players will perform better for our ff teams, nfl wagers, etc. At some point though, we have to accept that numbers are just numbers. -Hence the "lies, damned lies, and statistics" quote (which incidentally, was not Mark Twain, but Benjamin Disraeli who originally coined the phrase. but I tangent now too.) That's just my $.02

There's no "deterrent" part to Pass Interference, though. Basically, the DB is faced with a choice- don't interfere, and let him catch the pass... or do interfere, and we'll reward him as if he caught it anyway. Either one is just as severe. Now, I understand that interference is a 100% chance at the yardage being awarded whereas there's a chance the WR might drop it (maybe giving him a 75% chance of catching it naturally)... but at the same time, there's also the potential for the WR to run after the catch if you don't interfere, and that potential is gone with pass interference.A "deterrent" would be saying "as a punishment, we're going to make the end result MORE SEVERE than it would have been had you not cheated". Instead, with PI, they make the end result exactly as severe as it would have been had you not cheated- no more, no less. Which, again, takes me back to my basketball goaltending analogy- which is really the perfect analogy in this situation.As for the "PI is called too much already, let's not reward it!" crowd... that's a completely different argument. If the problem is "PI is being called incorrectly", the solution isn't "improperly record PI yardage", it's "work with the refs to improve PI calls".At the end of the day, all this is is a bookkeeping change. The field position from a PI doesn't change at all. There is absolutely no change in the on-field impact of PI. The only difference is that WRs who draw PI calls are now properly recognized and rewarded. Which is as they should be- it's a positive play for the offense! If my DE gets held on 20% of the snaps that he plays, I would want to know that, too, because that's a positive play for the defense. If my DT would have had 8 sacks, but instead the QB intentionally grounded each time, is it a fair and accurate description to have this DT look statistically identical to another DT who had 0 sacks because he never came within 5 feet of the opposing QB? It's simply a question of having the statistics more accurately describe what happened on the field.

As a 49ers fan I would like to say we do not need to give WRs anymore leverage in negotiating contracts.

That's a very silly position, imo. Tracking PI calls would improve the standing of 50% of the league's WRs vs. their peers. At the same time, it would worsen the standing of the other 50% of the league's WRs vs. their peers. In any comparison where one player benefits, another player will necessarily suffer. This doesn't change how much leverage WRs have as a whole, it just changes WHICH WRS HAVE THE LEVERAGE. It puts the leverage more in the hands of the WRs who are consistently making positive plays for the offense, which is where the leverage belongs in the first place.

I agree with this. SSOG said in the original post that the QB threw a perfect pass and the WR ran the perfect route, but that is not necessarily true. I have seen plenty of PI calls where I doubted the ball would have been caught. And even if the WR is in perfect position to make the catch does not mean he makes the catch... we see drops all the time.Furthermore, this raises the question of where one would draw the line. For example, if a running back is tackled by a defender penalized for grabbing the facemask or a horsecollar tackle, does the RB deserve more yards? After all, he presumably would have gotten more yards if not for the illegal tackle... but how many more should he be given? And what about defensive holding? The WR may have still run a perfect route, and the QB may still have thrown a perfect pass that would have been caught, but the holding occurred prior to the pass... why should one of those result in passing/receiving yards and one not result in passing/receiving yards?

I used the perfect pass/perfect route argument not as a characterization of all PI calls, but to provide a very simple and very palatable example where it seemed most just to award the QB and WR with the yardage.As for where the line is drawn... that's another easy one, and one that I've already mentioned. Spot fouls = tracked by player, Punitive fouls (penalties with set yardage) = tracked by team. An RB doesn't get extra yards on a facemask, because a facemask penalty isn't the league's way of saying "this is what WOULD HAVE happened, and we're going to make it happen anyway". It's not like the league believes that every time an RB gets pulled down by his facemask that he was on his way to gaining exactly 15 more yards.The only penalties that would get added to the player totals would be DPI and Intentional Grounding.

But the current statistics do describe what happened. Statistics are kept on penalty yards. In theory, every penalty that occurs could be the result of a play made by an opposing player... it is illogical to do this with some penalties and not others.

Statistics ARE kept on penalty yards, and in some instances, those statistics are assigned to certain players... and it's generally an improvement of statistics. I'm all for tracking holding penalties by offensive lineman and tracking holds drawn by defensive linemen, too. I think that would be a fantastic addition that would offer a far better description of what has actually happened during the season. Let's track false start and offsides by offending player, too. You want to come up with a cumulative "yardage lost to penalties" stat for offensive linemen, then I will applaud you all the way (although I'd keep false start separate from holding, because holding is a "better" penalty than false start- which is a whole different can of worms).And no, not every penalty can be the result of a play made by the opposing player. False start and delay of game, for instance. Late hit, unnecessary roughness, unsportsmanlike conduct.

Well, aren't there already judgement calls made in football scoring? For example, a drop by a WR is a judgement call is it not? It certainly isn't the case that every pass a WR gets two hands on but doesn't catch should be ruled a drop, and I'm pretty sure it isn't... which implies a judgement call by an official scorer, not unlike the judgement calls made in baseball for errors.That said, there are other cases where interceptions are not really the QB's fault that don't fit this model, like when a ball is tipped by a DL at the line... when the QB is blindsided right when he throws the ball... when a WR runs the wrong route and the QB throws to the right spot... etc. If the QB still gets blamed for those, why not just stick with the easy method of crediting them with all of them, as has always been done?

The drop is not an official NFL statistic.Also, I think plays batted at the line have to be credited to the QB (because some QBs have shown a demonstrable "skill" for having their passes batted, and also because the QB made the initial decision to try to get it past that DL in the first place). But that's neither here nor there. You're basically arguing "your proposed solution is imperfect because of these reasons, so why not just stick with the current method which is even more imperfect?"The goal here isn't to achieve perfection. The goal is to be closer tomorrow than we are today.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You could always start your own FF league with these rules in place . . . Let us know how that goes.

I'm not even talking from a fantasy football perspective. WRs are paid based on how many catches and how many yards they gain. If a WR goes for 1100 yards and draws 200 yards worth of interference penalties, then he had a better season than a guy who had 1200 yards receiving, and should be recognized as such.

Talk about screwing with the record books. Can we go back and credit JohnnyU, Joe Montana, and Dan Marino with yardage from interference calls?

This argument would fly if this was baseball. The NFL doesn't care about record books, or else they wouldn't have made the sack an official statistic in the '80s, and they wouldn't have added 2 more games in the late '70s, and they wouldn't be talking about adding 2 more games right now. You don't think the single season records are all going to wind up in the hands of current players if the league goes to 18 games? Do you really think the league cares?
The NFL is arguably the premier sports league in the U.S today. Twenty-five years ago it, it was a smidge above NHL and behind the NBA and MLB. What they did back then can;t be compared to what is done today. They care about recorsd now and realize they will have non-tainted records at that. You may not agree with all Goodell does, but he will ensure (for better or for worse) that the NFL is seen as the best league in all of sports today.
Link to post
Share on other sites

The NFL is arguably the premier sports league in the U.S today. Twenty-five years ago it, it was a smidge above NHL and behind the NBA and MLB. What they did back then can;t be compared to what is done today. They care about recorsd now and realize they will have non-tainted records at that. You may not agree with all Goodell does, but he will ensure (for better or for worse) that the NFL is seen as the best league in all of sports today.

If the NFL really cared about the sanctity of its records, it would not be making serious efforts to increase to an 18 game season.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy solution to make SSOG and the "purists" happy.New Stat -- Pass Interference Yardage. This way you can track which WR's are getting more of it without adultering the true yardage made by actual receptions.

Just thought of an idea to reward WR's who draw PI's. Give 2 points for each straight up with no yards. Less than 20 yards for the PI and the WR got more than yards would have been anyway. More than 20 yards and at least the WR got something but not 5-6 points for a long PI. Think about it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You are making a HUGE assumption that the pass would have been caught had there been no PI.

FWIW: I also greatly disagree with the current rule of making a PI a spot foul. Give them 5 or 15 yards and a new set of downs as the penalty. There are way too many variables to know if a WR would have really made a catch or not when interference occurs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are making a HUGE assumption that the pass would have been caught had there been no PI.FWIW: I also greatly disagree with the current rule of making a PI a spot foul. Give them 5 or 15 yards and a new set of downs as the penalty. There are way too many variables to know if a WR would have really made a catch or not when interference occurs.

I'm simply making the same huge assumption that the NFL is making by making PI a spot foul. If PI really was a 15 yard penalty then I wouldn't have a problem with the current setup, it's just that the current method basically says "we're going to pretend that you caught the ball, but we're not going to credit you as if you caught the ball".
Link to post
Share on other sites

Attention NFL: Please start crediting WRs with interceptions, when the QB throws a perfect ball and it is tipped by the WR and then intercepted.

I agree with this one (I know gianmarco said it, too- a hearty :goodposting: to both of you). Logistically, it would be a bit more difficult because it would require a judgment call... but on the other hand, it would be easy to strictly word it so that there was no judgment involved. And even if it did require a judgment call, it's not like that'd be the worst thing in the world- there's already a judgment call involved on whether a QB being tackled behind the LoS is a sack or a tackle for a loss.
There's already an official scorer for the game to award tackles and assists on defense, just like in baseball one judges a hit vs. an error.There's an official scorer already there so adding another judgment for statistical purposes to his (or her) duties doesn't seem like much to ask.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...