Kirk Cousins Is Not Better Than Joe Montana So Lets Fix Passer

Chad Henne2008-181,95975.555.3-20.3 Cam Newton2011-183,89186.466.1-20.3 RatingsRatings In the original conception of passer rating, an average rating was about 67. In 2018, only one qualified passer (Arizona Cardinals rookie Josh Rosen) fell below that threshold, and even then just barely (his rating was 66.7). But what if the standards for what makes a good or bad performance had evolved as leaguewide numbers changed? does a great job of adjusting for era with its Advanced Passing indices, which are centered on an average of 100 with 15 points representing 1 standard deviation in either direction. But I wanted to rescale the building blocks of passer rating itself to see how today’s passing numbers would translate to a rating if the NFL had simply allowed its rating system to change with the times.To do that, I looked at the distribution of stats in each category that goes into passer rating — completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdown percentage and interception rate — from the sample originally used to craft the formula back in the early 1970s (qualified passers from 1960 to 1970). Specifically, I figured out the spread of values (relative to the league) that, in a given category, led to the minimum number of points (0), the average number of points (1) and the maximum (2.375). Under the hood, passer rating is built around these ranges; it hands out points on that 0-to-2.375 scale in each category, then sums up the four values, divides by 6 and multiplies by 100. (Hence, 67 is supposed to be average — a 1.0 in four categories, divided by 6, times 100.)For any era, we can rescale what performance “should” lead to a given value in each category to keep the relative leaguewide distribution the same as it was when passer rating was first conceived.2Just like with PFR’s advanced passing stats, I calculated these distributions using qualified passers in rolling three-season periods to avoid a strange spread in one season causing overly volatile results. (To qualify, a passer needed at least 14 attempts per team game.) So while, say, Alex Smith’s 62.5 percent completion rate in 2018 was worth 1.0 point, so was Don Meredith’s 49.5 percent mark from 1962. Do this for every category in every season, and you have a stabilized version of passer rating that no longer spirals uncontrollably upward with each innovation in the passing game.Some ultra-high ratings change less than you might expect under this new method. Rodgers’s single-season record of 122.5 from 2011 tumbles all the way down to … 121.1. (He was very good that year.) But other seemingly immortal ratings, such as Kirk Cousins’s 99.7 mark this season, get knocked down quite a bit — in Cousins’s case, he falls to a much more reasonable 81.5 rating. (Anyone who watched a Vikings game this year would surely argue that this is more appropriate.) Similarly, Ryan Fitzpatrick’s 100.4 mark this season — yes, that is real, look it up — gets heavily penalized in the interception category (his 4.9 percent INT rate was more than double the league average), taking him down to an adjusted rating of 77.4.Moving further down the list, Joe Flacco’s decent-sounding 84.2 classic rating properly falls to a mediocre 62.8 after our adjustment, while the 30.7 rating of WOAT candidate Nathan Peterman becomes an 11.6 — perilously close to the minimum possible rating of 0.0. (If Peterman had thrown enough passes to qualify, that 11.6 rating would have “surpassed” Ryan Leaf’s 19.1 from 1998 as the lowest-rated season since 1950.)All told, the new ratings are once again grounded in a world where an average quarterback scores about 70 — not exactly 67 because the rolling distribution includes multiple seasons for comparison3Causing 2018 performances to score slightly higher on average, since this year was a better passing season than 2017. — and as a result, the numbers make far more intuitive sense at a glance than the ludicrously inflated official ratings of 2018: According to the NFL’s official passer rating system, the most efficient quarterback in NFL history is Green Bay’s Aaron Rodgers, with a lifetime mark of 103.1.1Pro football’s passer rating has a possible range from 0 to 158.3. That makes sense: Rodgers is generally regarded as one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game. But if you scroll further down the list, the results become much harder to explain. In the world of passer rating, Kirk Cousins is better than Joe Montana; Derek Carr and Matt Schaub top Dan Marino; and, after one season, Broadway Sam Darnold is running circles around Broadway Joe Namath.Passer rating is often criticized as Byzantine (have you seen that formula?), incomplete (it does not include data on rushing plays or sacks) and arbitrary (again, have you looked at the formula?). Yet its biggest shortcoming might be the way it is unmoored from changes in the game itself. Passing has never been more efficient than it was this season, in which the league’s average QB posted a rating of 92.9. That is remarkably high considering that a quarterback who posted a rating of 92.9 would have led all qualified passers in 15 separate seasons from 1950 through 1986. Clearly, the scale needs recalibrating. 28J. FlaccoBAL84.262.8 PlayerTeamOldNew 12S. Jurgensen197482.782.927N. Lomax198882.778.1 26J. WinstonTB90.264.9 14R. FitzpatrickTB100.477.4 * Minimum 14 pass attempts per team gameSource: 10K. CousinsMIN99.781.5 Ratings According to the NFL’s official system, there have been 93 qualified quarterback seasons since 1950 with a passer rating of at least 100.0, and nine of those happened in 2018 alone. After our adjustment, though, there have been only 46 such seasons since 1950,4Four QB seasons cracked the 100.0 mark under the new system but didn’t under the classic passer rating. and only one of those happened this year — the 103.3 mark Drew Brees put up with the Saints. It’s still a golden age for passing, as nearly half of those 46 seasons have happened since 2000, but we’ve also filtered out 51 “false 100s” — seasons that cracked 100.0 on the old scale but not the new one — of which 47 have happened since 2000.The result of our passer rating adjustment is a much more reasonable career leaderboard that features qualified quarterbacks from a variety of different eras: Deflating the ratingClassic and adjusted passer ratings for qualified* 2018 NFL quarterbacks 8D. Brees201897.785.423J. Unitas197378.378.9 Ryan Fitzpatrick2005-184,28581.160.2-20.9 5P. RiversLAC105.587.3 12D. PrescottDAL96.979.0 Case Keenum2013-181,84484.561.8-22.6 * Minimum 1,500 career pass attemptsSource: 9A. RodgersGB97.683.0 PlayerTeamOldNew 8J. GoffLAR101.183.3 30B. BortlesJAX79.854.5 7C. WentzPHI102.285.1 32J. AllenBUF67.937.1 2P. MahomesKC113.898.5 22R. TannehillMIA92.768.8 23M. StaffordDET89.968.6 PlayerYears PlayedAttemptsOldNewDiff. 6D. WatsonHOU103.185.3 13T. BradyNE97.778.8 A new all-time passer rating hierarchyCareer classic and adjusted passer ratings for qualified* NFL and AFL quarterbacks, 1950-2018 13L. Dawson197582.982.728F. Ryan197078.078.0 29C. KeenumDEN81.256.2 Jameis Winston2015-181,92287.864.0-23.8 4M. RyanATL108.193.4 6R. Staubach197983.486.721J. Garcia200887.579.6 33J. RosenARI66.735.9 Ratings 4T. Brady201897.687.219C. Pennington201090.179.9 * Minimum 1,500 career pass attemptsSource: 25A. DaltonCIN89.666.1 PlayerLast YearOldNewPlayerLast YearOldNew 1S. Young199996.794.216F. Tarkenton197880.480.7 18E. ManningNYG92.472.3 31S. DarnoldNYJ77.649.7 21M. MariotaTEN92.370.6 5P. Manning201596.587.120M. Ryan201894.979.8 Ratings The biggest beneficiaries of our changes are 1950s-era passers like Otto Graham, who originally rated in the 70s (discarding his eye-popping pre-1950 numbers, which were compiled in the upstart All-America Football Conference) but leaps up into the mid-80s after judging him in comparison with his peers. San Francisco 49ers legend Steve Young also gets a boost relative to other great QBs from history, reclaiming the No. 1 slot that he’d held in real life before Rodgers and friends came along.At the other end of the spectrum, nobody loses more points of career rating than Blake Bortles, who somehow has an 80.6 mark under the classic system but falls to 55.2 with our adjustments. Here are the biggest losers between the old and new QB ratings: 7R. Wilson2018100.485.422B. R’lisberger201894.379.0 9T. Romo201697.185.024D. Fouts198780.278.4 10O. Graham195578.284.725R. Gannon200484.778.4 Marcus Mariota2015-181,60589.467.5-21.9 2A. Rodgers2018103.192.517B. Starr197180.580.7 3R. WilsonSEA110.996.5 14D. Marino199986.481.429B. Jones198278.578.0 15K. Anderson198681.981.230J. Kelly199684.478.0 Blake Bortles2014-182,63280.655.2-25.4 15B. R’lisbergerPIT96.575.7 Who’s been overrated in traditional passer ratings?For qualified* NFL and AFL passers since 1950, the biggest shortfalls between adjusted and classic passer rating 1D. BreesNO115.7103.3 11A. LuckIND98.779.1 3J. Montana199492.390.018P. Rivers201895.680.5 17M. TrubiskyCHI95.473.2 Ryan Tannehill2012-182,91187.067.2-19.8 11K. Warner200993.783.726B. Griese198077.178.3 24N. MullensSF90.866.3 Mark Sanchez2009-182,32073.352.5-20.8 16D. CarrOAK93.974.0 27A. SmithWSH85.764.5 20B. MayfieldCLE93.771.7 Derek Carr2014-182,80088.868.4-20.4 19C. NewtonCAR94.271.7 A change like this wouldn’t fix the rest of passer rating’s deficiencies, and it wouldn’t include all the fancy bells and whistles you’ll find in a metric like ESPN’s Total Quarterback Rating. But passer rating itself has always been a surprisingly decent metric within any self-contained era; the team with the higher passer rating (by any margin) in a game wins about 80 percent of the time. It’s the comparisons across eras that have become distorted as the game has changed over time. But a simple fix tethering modern stats to the standards contained in passer rating’s formula would go a long way toward restoring sanity to the metric you still see in every NFL box score and broadcast. The Blake Bortleses of the world might not like seeing their shiny 80-something ratings get dumped into the 50s, but it’s a change whose time has come.Check out our latest NFL predictions. read more

Revenue Department stationed in northern TCI

first_imgFacebook Twitter Google+LinkedInPinterestWhatsApp Mother charged with murder of her young son Child dead and man arrested on Taylor murder Facebook Twitter Google+LinkedInPinterestWhatsAppProvidenciales, 27 Oct 2015 – North and Middle Caicos are getting some tailor made service from the Revenue Department which will fly in so that paying government bills or making enquiries will be easier. The officers are there since Monday and will be in the two islands until this Friday. District Commissioner, Cynclair Musgrove said: “The District Commissioner’s Office and the Communities of North & Middle Caicos welcome the Revenue Department as we are striving to continue improving service delivery and further assist the Officers with improving customer education and voluntary compliance in North & Middle Caicos.” The team will be stationed at the DCs office in Bottle Creek, North Caicos. Among the tasks: inspections and audits, service delivery improvements and registering businesses. Musgrove says the scheduled visits will be an ongoing service. Related Items:bottle creek, cynclair musgrove, north and middle caicos, revenue department Recommended for you PNP Administration leaders serve Elderly in New Year’s Partylast_img read more

Appropriations Committee Asks for Detailed Analysis of Infrastructure Needs in BRAC Study

first_imgCiting its concern about the Pentagon’s repeated calls for a new BRAC round, the House Appropriations Committee directs DOD to provide a comprehensive assessment of its infrastructure needs.“Though the committee is not endorsing or precluding another BRAC round, it is interested in more detailed information that would help lead Congress to make an informed decision on that question,” states the committee report accompanying the fiscal 2016 military construction-veterans affairs spending measure that was released Tuesday.The committee requests DOD provide by Dec. 31, 2015, a comprehensive inventory of military installations as well as:a description of the infrastructure necessary to support ongoing defense activities;a discussion of categories of excess infrastructure and infrastructure capacity, and “the secretary’s  targets for the reduction of such excess capacity”;an assessment of the excess infrastructure and the value of retaining certain excess infrastructure to support surge or reversibility requirements; andan analysis of the economic impact of the closure or realignment of installations to reduce excess infrastructure.To determine the extent of excess capacity, the department should consider:the anticipated continuing need for and availability of installations outside the United States, along with the potential for future restrictions on their use; andany efficiencies that may be gained from joint tenancy by more than one branch at an installation or by reorganizing two or more installations into a single facility.The analysis would require a certification from the defense secretary regarding the need for the closure or realignment of installations. The committee also asks the secretary to certify that “every recommendation for closure or realignment of military installations in a round of closures and realignments will result in annual net savings for each of the military departments within six years” after a new round begins.The committee’s request mirrors very closely language in the House version of the FY 2015 defense authorization bill. That provision, which was viewed as a possible first step toward congressional approval of the department’s request for a new BRAC round, was struck from the compromise version of the policy bill, however.In this case, the request for an assessment of DOD’s infrastructure needs may not be as significant since the Appropriations Committee is not responsible for authorizing a BRAC round, but it seems to signal that the committee’s military construction-veterans affairs panel believes a strong case could be made for a future round.The committee report for the milcon spending bill can be found on its website. Dan Cohen AUTHORlast_img read more

Snowball the dancing cockatoo gets serious scrutiny from science

first_imgEnlarge ImageSnowball got down for a Taco Bell ad. Video screenshot by Amanda Kooser/CNET Ha, ha! Check this out! It’s a dancing cockatoo! This is how Snowball, a bird with a passion for dance, made the rounds as a viral video sensation getting down to the Backstreet Boys back in 2007. But Snowball is more than an amusement, he’s also the star of a new scientific study.Researchers are studying Snowball to learn how dancing can transcend the human condition and extend to our avian friends. “Spontaneity and diversity of movement to music are not uniquely human” is the title of a paper published Monday in the journal Current Biology.A previous parrot study (and one with a sea lion) showed some animals can keep a musical beat, but this new Snowball research suggests the bird is inventing moves as he goes.  1 The science team, led by cognitive neuroscientist Aniruddh Patel of Tufts University and Harvard University, filmed Snowball dancing to Queen’s Another One Bites the Dust and Cyndi Lauper’s Girls Just Want to Have Fun. They analyzed the bird’s movements.The researchers counted 14 distinct dance moves and two composite movements. Snowball’s skills included a body roll, head bobs, foot lifts, head banging and a move reminiscent of Madonna’s ’90s Vogue dance craze. Snowball’s dance snippets tended to be performed for several seconds each, and he changed up his routine each time he heard a song again. “What’s most interesting to us is the sheer diversity of his movements to music,” Patel said in a statement on Monday. The study suggests Snowball may be displaying creativity in his dancing. The research team is currently investigating if the cockatoo’s capers are a form of social interaction with his human caregivers. Sea lion may be first nonhuman mammal to keep a beat Cussing rescue parrot forges sweet Amazon Alexa friendship 11 Photos The researchers said a collection of shared traits between humans and parrots might be responsible for Snowball’s dancing prowess: “(1) complex vocal learning, (2) the capacity for nonverbal movement imitation, (3) a tendency to form long-term social bonds, (4) the ability to learn complex sequences of actions, and (5) attentiveness to communicative movements.”Snowball’s talent first came to light after he was taken in by the Bird Lovers Only rescue agency in South Carolina in 2007. Besides his viral fame, he also starred in a Taco Bell commercial.Snowball seems to be showing that cutting a rug and getting creative with it isn’t just for people. Perhaps he’ll earn himself an invite to Dancing with the Stars. Commentcenter_img 11 spectacular suits of animal battle armor (pictures) Curious critters Share your voice Tags Sci-Techlast_img read more