2025 Schedule Thread

A place to talk with fellow fans and foes about the Washington Commanders.
Thinking Skins
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2025 3:18 pm
Reactions score: 3
skinsinparadise wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 2:48 pm
These win totals, provided by BetMGM, will pay out for those wagering on the under. Washington’s merciless schedule, Miami’s hollow roster and Arizona’s trouble staying afloat in a very resurgent NFC West will contribute to what fans may consider a disappointing season on all fronts, unless of course they hedge their personal feelings with a counter wager against their teams’ success.
Vegas knows nothing.

They predicted Washington to win like 6 games before last year.
skinsinparadise
Posts: 259
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2025 4:57 pm
Reactions score: 239
Warhead36 wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 12:56 pm
An elite QB puts your floor at 9 wins. Its basically impossible to not have at least a .500 ish record if your QB is top notch unless you're just ravaged by injuries like the 9ers last year (and I question if Purdy is really top notch I think he's more in that 2nd tier).

I mean the Bengals won 9 games with a historically bad defense and garbage OL because of Burrow.
But if the idea is it just matters that the Qb is better why should it matter that their defense sucks? I thought that was the overall point being presented. It's the QB versus the other QBs, everything else is a sidebar.

Cincy's was definitely not an "historically" bad defense. it was ranked 22 by PFF. 25th in yards. 26th in points. It wasn't that close to being the worst defense in the NFL last year let alone historically bad.
Last edited by skinsinparadise on Wed May 28, 2025 3:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
skinsinparadise
Posts: 259
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2025 4:57 pm
Reactions score: 239
Thinking Skins wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 2:51 pm
skinsinparadise wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 2:48 pm
These win totals, provided by BetMGM, will pay out for those wagering on the under. Washington’s merciless schedule, Miami’s hollow roster and Arizona’s trouble staying afloat in a very resurgent NFC West will contribute to what fans may consider a disappointing season on all fronts, unless of course they hedge their personal feelings with a counter wager against their teams’ success.
Vegas knows nothing.

They predicted Washington to win like 6 games before last year.
I like your confidence. Sharp doesn't know. Vegas doesn't know. Logan Paulsen can talk about it from the perspective of a player but does he really know? And i am gathering you seem confident that you are the one who knows how to evaluate whether a schedule is tough or it isn't -- versus name that other outfit.

That's cool. Just seeing some of those games in person including the one against the mighty Saints last season. It feels more of a challange to me for example facing the LA Chargers on the road than NO. Or facing the Lions at home versus Carolina. I am not out on a limb on this point. You are out on a limb.

And look that's cool. I love it when I have outlier points that I am willing to hang my hat on and see it play out. I don't have one on this point but have had some on other ones. You got an outlier point about this schedule being soft. And if you end up right and so many others end up wrong, it's a nice victory of a point for you. It's boring to agree with the masses.
Thinking Skins
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2025 3:18 pm
Reactions score: 3
skinsinparadise wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 3:00 pm
Thinking Skins wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 2:51 pm
skinsinparadise wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 2:48 pm
These win totals, provided by BetMGM, will pay out for those wagering on the under. Washington’s merciless schedule, Miami’s hollow roster and Arizona’s trouble staying afloat in a very resurgent NFC West will contribute to what fans may consider a disappointing season on all fronts, unless of course they hedge their personal feelings with a counter wager against their teams’ success.
Vegas knows nothing.

They predicted Washington to win like 6 games before last year.
I like your confidence. Sharp doesn't know. Vegas doesn't know. Logan Paulsen can talk about it from the perspective of a player but does he really know? And i am gathering you seem confident that you are the one who knows how to evaluate whether a schedule is tough or it isn't -- versus name that other outfit.

That's cool. Just seeing some of those games in person including the one against the mighty Saints last season. It feels more of a challange to me for example facing the LA Chargers on the road than NO. Or facing the Lions at home versus Carolina. I am not out on a limb on this point. You are out on a limb.

And look that's cool. I love it when I have outlier points that I am willing to hang my hat on and see it play out. I don't have one on this point but have had some on other ones. You got an outlier point about this schedule being soft. And if you end up right and so many others end up wrong, it's a nice victory of a point for you. It's boring to agree with the masses.
It's not an outlier point. It's a metric that goes in line with the QB driven league. It's not just intuition. Most of the easiest schedules are consistent playoff teams, or really top QBs. This Is it offseason talk this is what the NFL is made for it's quarterbacks
skinsinparadise
Posts: 259
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2025 4:57 pm
Reactions score: 239
Thinking Skins wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 3:42 pm
skinsinparadise wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 3:00 pm
Thinking Skins wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 2:51 pm


Vegas knows nothing.

They predicted Washington to win like 6 games before last year.
I like your confidence. Sharp doesn't know. Vegas doesn't know. Logan Paulsen can talk about it from the perspective of a player but does he really know? And i am gathering you seem confident that you are the one who knows how to evaluate whether a schedule is tough or it isn't -- versus name that other outfit.

That's cool. Just seeing some of those games in person including the one against the mighty Saints last season. It feels more of a challange to me for example facing the LA Chargers on the road than NO. Or facing the Lions at home versus Carolina. I am not out on a limb on this point. You are out on a limb.

And look that's cool. I love it when I have outlier points that I am willing to hang my hat on and see it play out. I don't have one on this point but have had some on other ones. You got an outlier point about this schedule being soft. And if you end up right and so many others end up wrong, it's a nice victory of a point for you. It's boring to agree with the masses.
It's not an outlier point. It's a metric that goes in line with the QB driven league. It's not just intuition. Most of the easiest schedules are consistent playoff teams, or really top QBs. This Is it offseason talk this is what the NFL is made for it's quarterbacks
It's an outlier point from the perspective that everyone else that can I recall digesting the schedule whether its from an anaylitic standpoint, or stats, or narrative or outfits that make money on betting this issue alas Vegas considers this a tough schedule. You came up with your own version of how to evaluate their schedule and judge it as soft. Your point doesn't flow with most. It's different. That's OK.

But no your take doesn't fit the average take I've read-watching about this schedule or for that matter the typical fan point of view including my own. And that's OK. Just because you are absolutely convinced your take of using who has the higher QBR in the matchup should be the slam dunk version of how to judge a schedule doesn't make it a fact.

Saying for example Vegas knows nothing because they got Washington's record wrong last year to me is odd. Yeah of course EVERYONE is going to get things wrong, including you, so if the metric is if such and such got something wrong we can dismiss everything that they predict in the future -- that point would also then encompass your thoughts, where off the top of my head I can recall you being wrong about things. As have I. As have everyone.
Thinking Skins
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2025 3:18 pm
Reactions score: 3
skinsinparadise wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 3:55 pm
Thinking Skins wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 3:42 pm
skinsinparadise wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 3:00 pm


I like your confidence. Sharp doesn't know. Vegas doesn't know. Logan Paulsen can talk about it from the perspective of a player but does he really know? And i am gathering you seem confident that you are the one who knows how to evaluate whether a schedule is tough or it isn't -- versus name that other outfit.

That's cool. Just seeing some of those games in person including the one against the mighty Saints last season. It feels more of a challange to me for example facing the LA Chargers on the road than NO. Or facing the Lions at home versus Carolina. I am not out on a limb on this point. You are out on a limb.

And look that's cool. I love it when I have outlier points that I am willing to hang my hat on and see it play out. I don't have one on this point but have had some on other ones. You got an outlier point about this schedule being soft. And if you end up right and so many others end up wrong, it's a nice victory of a point for you. It's boring to agree with the masses.
It's not an outlier point. It's a metric that goes in line with the QB driven league. It's not just intuition. Most of the easiest schedules are consistent playoff teams, or really top QBs. This Is it offseason talk this is what the NFL is made for it's quarterbacks
It's an outlier point from the perspective that everyone else that can I recall digesting the schedule whether its from an anaylitic standpoint, or stats, or narrative or outfits that make money on betting this issue alas Vegas considers this a tough schedule. You came up with your own version of how to evaluate their schedule and judge it as soft. Your point doesn't flow with most. It's different. That's OK.

But no your take doesn't fit the average take I've read-watching about this schedule or for that matter the typical fan point of view including my own. And that's OK. Just because you are absolutely convinced your take of using who has the higher QBR in the matchup should be the slam dunk version of how to judge a schedule doesn't make it a fact.

Saying for example Vegas knows nothing because they got Washington's record wrong last year to me is odd. Yeah of course EVERYONE is going to get things wrong, including you, so if the metric is if such and such got something wrong we can dismiss everything that they predict in the future -- that point would also then encompass your thoughts, where off the top of my head I can recall you being wrong about things. As have I. As have everyone.
So what I just presented is data real data not a intuition but data it's a way of measuring the schedule by the QBR metric and so that's saying how my quarterback how any quarterback measures against the quarterback they're playing against so it's a way of measuring the schedule by the quarterbacks so it's a way of judging the quarterbacks and by judging the schedule by that metrics you can see who has more difficult schedules I don't see how it's an outlier in that way I don't see any way of judging it I mean you can call in our life you want it if you want to All it is the metric though I mean it's a it's a look at the quarterback driven League and say okay since so much of the weight is on the quarterback in this league why not have a metric that looks at the schedule by way of the quarterbacks I mean it should be obvious to me that we do that. If I'm way out of line I'm way out of line but the whole thing is like I said we were so far off last year that I mean who's to say what Vegas knows like Chris Russell has a rant he goes on every year when he says Vegas knows nothing that's why I got that right from Vegas knows nothing. So I mean like really what does Vegas know who is Vegas to say this stuff what does Warren Sharp know Yes there are animals out there but I'm saying what does what do these analytics know what makes their models better than the QB driven model that based on QBR All I'm saying is this QBR model, Maybe it can be perfected or improved but it does give more insight into the schedule in my opinion then something like air miles or last year's rental does
Thinking Skins
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2025 3:18 pm
Reactions score: 3
@skinsinparadise
So the the flaw that I have with this is that you are saying that I should be be looking at the results of the model and say that because the models are saying that commanders have a easy schedule a hard schedule that makes the models inaccurate or accurate or whatever. I'm saying that it should be the methodology of the model I'm saying that the model should look at what the league values as important the league does not value air miles as important. The League values quarterbacks as important so the model should value quarterbacks as important. That's what I'm saying the model should do. And so what the model should then do is take that into account. And by doing that the schedule ranking should come out naturally.
skinsinparadise
Posts: 259
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2025 4:57 pm
Reactions score: 239
Thinking Skins wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 4:18 pm
@skinsinparadise
So the the flaw that I have with this is that you are saying that I should be be looking at the results of the model and say that because the models are saying that commanders have a easy schedule a hard schedule that makes the models inaccurate or accurate or whatever. I'm saying that it should be the methodology of the model I'm saying that the model should look at what the league values as important the league does not value air miles as important. The League values quarterbacks as important so the model should value quarterbacks as important. That's what I'm saying the model should do. And so what the model should then do is take that into account. And by doing that the schedule ranking should come out naturally.
The way you keep bringing up the air miles seems silly and comes off like you want to hang on a strawman based argument considering I've already explained to you it was not the crux of the point. I said most evaluate the schedule by either records from last season or analytical based judgments of team strengths headed to the next season.

The idea that this team has the third worst rest differential and traveling the 10th most is the gravy part of the point and I am sorry I brought it up considering you are just using those variables to prop your argument as if that's what this is about when you know it isn't.

This is the argument unless I am missing something. Outfit after outfit, ex-players, national media, anayltical outfits are making this argument.

A. The past is prologue or close enough. Teams that were good last year and made the playoffs are likely to be good this year. Odds are better that the Chiefs for example will be better than the Saints. So the simplest way some do it is records last season and or whether they made the playoffs.

B. Some anaylitical types, the dudes who used to work at Footbal Outsiders, PFF, Sharp, etc do their analysis based on strength of rosters and project how these teams are going to be. And judge the schedule that way.

You are acting like QB has no major importance as to how they come up with this. And only you smartly hang on the QBR ranking is factoring QB play as part of the soup. That's a bit silly. I'll start with I know the analytic outfits consider QB very strongly in the mix, they talk about it all the time. PFF for example is obsessed. They aren't as extreme on the point as you have become but they are plenty strong enough.

No projection is perfect. They are going to get some of it wrong. There are always new teams that make the playoffs and teams fall off, etc. But, the odds are better that teams like the Chiefs, Lions, Vikings, etc are going to be better than the Panthers, Saints, Bears, etc. It won't all break out that way but enough will break out that way where you can judge in advance whether a schedule is likely hard or soft.

Look even the most elementary way of looking at strength of schedule factors QB big -- especially using your logic. If your record as you claim is just all about QB play then what better way to judge a schedule than the team's past record assuming they have the same QB from last season. QB = team record. So how can you have a beef with assessing a team based on their record considering their record was amassed just about entirely from their QB using your logic?

Now your counter and correct me wrong is something like this.

These outfits all have their head up their butt. They talk to death about the value of a QB. So why not do this the simplest way possible and do head to head QBRs for the QBs, and call it a day. And this is the absolute correct way to do this otherwise their assessments don't match their rhetoric. So you have a model that truly judges the difficulty of a schedule that matches their rhetoric on QBs so how can it not be the right way to do this?

The answer is these teams INDEED factor QB play in their predictions. The argument that you have versus them is QBR is the gift to assess all. You understand this. They don't but should.

Look, I know these guys are aware of the QBR metric. However, I've never heard anyone say whomever has the better QB, drop the mic, is how to run down every match up, let alone its all about the QBR metric. That's your own drill. And its your own interpretation of how you think everyone should see things.

Look I like to look at QBR as much as anyone. But its far from a perfect metric as we've debated on other points on other QBs in the past. And I think you are taking those scores way too literallly where an inch apart means to you a mile. You can goof on dudes like Jared Goff but his QBR isn't that different from Jayden. Jordan Love is neck and neck as to his score. According to QBR rankings Purdy >> Mahomes.

Heck I recall when Rivera was talking abot how he studied the "anayltics" on Wentz himself. Wentz was ranked 9th as to QBR when we traded for him. I am pretty sure that was what he was referencing. On that count, Wentz was better than QBs like Joe Burrow and Lamar Jackson. So how can we go wrong riding on QBR. We just traded a 3rd round pick for a dude who is better than Burrow and Lamar.

PFF has their own metrics. Jayden scores well on it. But they got differences with their scores versus QBR on a number of QBs. Herbert for example ranks higher than Jayden with PFF. But Jayden scores better with QBR.

But my point is for you to wish the media and Vegas and the anayltical outfits to run everything by QBR you are going to really have to sell that metric as being very special with almost no flaws versus the more comprehensive takes others use to judge this. Ditto the idea that the QB isn't just a a big factor in the match up but is the only factor and the only way to judge that only factor is via QBR scores.
Thinking Skins
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2025 3:18 pm
Reactions score: 3
skinsinparadise wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 5:56 pm
Thinking Skins wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 4:18 pm
@skinsinparadise
So the the flaw that I have with this is that you are saying that I should be be looking at the results of the model and say that because the models are saying that commanders have a easy schedule a hard schedule that makes the models inaccurate or accurate or whatever. I'm saying that it should be the methodology of the model I'm saying that the model should look at what the league values as important the league does not value air miles as important. The League values quarterbacks as important so the model should value quarterbacks as important. That's what I'm saying the model should do. And so what the model should then do is take that into account. And by doing that the schedule ranking should come out naturally.
The way you keep bringing up the air miles seems silly and comes off like you want to hang on a strawman based argument considering I've already explained to you it was not the crux of the point. I said most evaluate the schedule by either records from last season or analytical based judgments of team strengths headed to the next season.

The idea that this team has the third worst rest differential and traveling the 10th most is the gravy part of the point and I am sorry I brought it up considering you are just using those variables to prop your argument as if that's what this is about when you know it isn't.

This is the argument unless I am missing something. Outfit after outfit, ex-players, national media, anayltical outfits are making this argument.

A. The past is prologue or close enough. Teams that were good last year and made the playoffs are likely to be good this year. Odds are better that the Chiefs for example will be better than the Saints. So the simplest way some do it is records last season and or whether they made the playoffs.

B. Some anaylitical types, the dudes who used to work at Footbal Outsiders, PFF, Sharp, etc do their analysis based on strength of rosters and project how these teams are going to be. And judge the schedule that way.

You are acting like QB has no major importance as to how they come up with this. And only you smartly hang on the QBR ranking is factoring QB play as part of the soup. That's a bit silly. I'll start with I know the analytic outfits consider QB very strongly in the mix, they talk about it all the time. PFF for example is obsessed. They aren't as extreme on the point as you have become but they are plenty strong enough.

No projection is perfect. They are going to get some of it wrong. There are always new teams that make the playoffs and teams fall off, etc. But, the odds are better that teams like the Chiefs, Lions, Vikings, etc are going to be better than the Panthers, Saints, Bears, etc. It won't all break out that way but enough will break out that way where you can judge in advance whether a schedule is likely hard or soft.

Look even the most elementary way of looking at strength of schedule factors QB big -- especially using your logic. If your record as you claim is just all about QB play then what better way to judge a schedule than the team's past record assuming they have the same QB from last season. QB = team record. So how can you have a beef with assessing a team based on their record considering their record was amassed just about entirely from their QB using your logic?

Now your counter and correct me wrong is something like this.

These outfits all have their head up their butt. They talk to death about the value of a QB. So why not do this the simplest way possible and do head to head QBRs for the QBs, and call it a day. And this is the absolute correct way to do this otherwise their assessments don't match their rhetoric. So you have a model that truly judges the difficulty of a schedule that matches their rhetoric on QBs so how can it not be the right way to do this?

The answer is these teams INDEED factor QB play in their predictions. The argument that you have versus them is QBR is the gift to assess all. You understand this. They don't but should.

Look, I know these guys are aware of the QBR metric. However, I've never heard anyone say whomever has the better QB, drop the mic, is how to run down every match up, let alone its all about the QBR metric. That's your own drill. And its your own interpretation of how you think everyone should see things.

Look I like to look at QBR as much as anyone. But its far from a perfect metric as we've debated on other points on other QBs in the past. And I think you are taking those scores way too literallly where an inch apart means to you a mile. You can goof on dudes like Jared Goff but his QBR isn't that different from Jayden. Jordan Love is neck and neck as to his score. According to QBR rankings Purdy >> Mahomes.

Heck I recall when Rivera was talking abot how he studied the "anayltics" on Wentz himself. Wentz was ranked 9th as to QBR when we traded for him. I am pretty sure that was what he was referencing. On that count, Wentz was better than QBs like Joe Burrow and Lamar Jackson. So how can we go wrong riding on QBR. We just traded a 3rd round pick for a dude who is better than Burrow and Lamar.

PFF has their own metrics. Jayden scores well on it. But they got differences with their scores versus QBR on a number of QBs. Herbert for example ranks higher than Jayden with PFF. But Jayden scores better with QBR.

But my point is for you to wish the media and Vegas and the anayltical outfits to run everything by QBR you are going to really have to sell that metric as being very special with almost no flaws versus the more comprehensive takes others use to judge this. Ditto the idea that the QB isn't just a a big factor in the match up but is the only factor and the only way to judge that only factor is via QBR scores.
I'm not going to discount PFF because I know they use QB driven stuff. I'm just saying that all the attention I'm hearing given to air miles was driving me crazy. It's was on Al Galdi, Kevin Sheehan, the junkies etc. and it's just off-season talk. When the season talks they'll just use it as a placeholder and a point of reference.

It's not that it doesn't matter, but it's something that's down the line vs something as important as QB. Maybe I should consider other things like pff does like this analytics. But give me a break and that's a million dollar organization and I'm just one dude. I just wanted to prove a point that not all analytics would have us with bad schedule predictions. BECAUSE we have a good QB. That means we'll be in every game at minimum, with our QB winning some of them in the end.

Should I find a way to count other factors like the defenses we're playing against our the weapons the QBs have? I'd love to. But this is a new model. The alternative model I was thinking of was a fantasy football version.

I don't see why it's so controversial. I'm just trying to state a different opinion. One that's mathematically based. So what if it's out there. I don't believe in the air miles metric and the attention is getting. That's what inspired me. Hopefully somebody else liked my work. I enjoyed doing it because it was a break from some stress in my life.

Anybody. Anywhere. Anytime.
skinsinparadise
Posts: 259
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2025 4:57 pm
Reactions score: 239
Thinking Skins wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 6:35 pm
skinsinparadise wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 5:56 pm
Thinking Skins wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 4:18 pm
@skinsinparadise
So the the flaw that I have with this is that you are saying that I should be be looking at the results of the model and say that because the models are saying that commanders have a easy schedule a hard schedule that makes the models inaccurate or accurate or whatever. I'm saying that it should be the methodology of the model I'm saying that the model should look at what the league values as important the league does not value air miles as important. The League values quarterbacks as important so the model should value quarterbacks as important. That's what I'm saying the model should do. And so what the model should then do is take that into account. And by doing that the schedule ranking should come out naturally.
The way you keep bringing up the air miles seems silly and comes off like you want to hang on a strawman based argument considering I've already explained to you it was not the crux of the point. I said most evaluate the schedule by either records from last season or analytical based judgments of team strengths headed to the next season.

The idea that this team has the third worst rest differential and traveling the 10th most is the gravy part of the point and I am sorry I brought it up considering you are just using those variables to prop your argument as if that's what this is about when you know it isn't.

This is the argument unless I am missing something. Outfit after outfit, ex-players, national media, anayltical outfits are making this argument.

A. The past is prologue or close enough. Teams that were good last year and made the playoffs are likely to be good this year. Odds are better that the Chiefs for example will be better than the Saints. So the simplest way some do it is records last season and or whether they made the playoffs.

B. Some anaylitical types, the dudes who used to work at Footbal Outsiders, PFF, Sharp, etc do their analysis based on strength of rosters and project how these teams are going to be. And judge the schedule that way.

You are acting like QB has no major importance as to how they come up with this. And only you smartly hang on the QBR ranking is factoring QB play as part of the soup. That's a bit silly. I'll start with I know the analytic outfits consider QB very strongly in the mix, they talk about it all the time. PFF for example is obsessed. They aren't as extreme on the point as you have become but they are plenty strong enough.

No projection is perfect. They are going to get some of it wrong. There are always new teams that make the playoffs and teams fall off, etc. But, the odds are better that teams like the Chiefs, Lions, Vikings, etc are going to be better than the Panthers, Saints, Bears, etc. It won't all break out that way but enough will break out that way where you can judge in advance whether a schedule is likely hard or soft.

Look even the most elementary way of looking at strength of schedule factors QB big -- especially using your logic. If your record as you claim is just all about QB play then what better way to judge a schedule than the team's past record assuming they have the same QB from last season. QB = team record. So how can you have a beef with assessing a team based on their record considering their record was amassed just about entirely from their QB using your logic?

Now your counter and correct me wrong is something like this.

These outfits all have their head up their butt. They talk to death about the value of a QB. So why not do this the simplest way possible and do head to head QBRs for the QBs, and call it a day. And this is the absolute correct way to do this otherwise their assessments don't match their rhetoric. So you have a model that truly judges the difficulty of a schedule that matches their rhetoric on QBs so how can it not be the right way to do this?

The answer is these teams INDEED factor QB play in their predictions. The argument that you have versus them is QBR is the gift to assess all. You understand this. They don't but should.

Look, I know these guys are aware of the QBR metric. However, I've never heard anyone say whomever has the better QB, drop the mic, is how to run down every match up, let alone its all about the QBR metric. That's your own drill. And its your own interpretation of how you think everyone should see things.

Look I like to look at QBR as much as anyone. But its far from a perfect metric as we've debated on other points on other QBs in the past. And I think you are taking those scores way too literallly where an inch apart means to you a mile. You can goof on dudes like Jared Goff but his QBR isn't that different from Jayden. Jordan Love is neck and neck as to his score. According to QBR rankings Purdy >> Mahomes.

Heck I recall when Rivera was talking abot how he studied the "anayltics" on Wentz himself. Wentz was ranked 9th as to QBR when we traded for him. I am pretty sure that was what he was referencing. On that count, Wentz was better than QBs like Joe Burrow and Lamar Jackson. So how can we go wrong riding on QBR. We just traded a 3rd round pick for a dude who is better than Burrow and Lamar.

PFF has their own metrics. Jayden scores well on it. But they got differences with their scores versus QBR on a number of QBs. Herbert for example ranks higher than Jayden with PFF. But Jayden scores better with QBR.

But my point is for you to wish the media and Vegas and the anayltical outfits to run everything by QBR you are going to really have to sell that metric as being very special with almost no flaws versus the more comprehensive takes others use to judge this. Ditto the idea that the QB isn't just a a big factor in the match up but is the only factor and the only way to judge that only factor is via QBR scores.
I'm not going to discount PFF because I know they use QB driven stuff. I'm just saying that all the attention I'm hearing given to air miles was driving me crazy. It's was on Al Galdi, Kevin Sheehan, the junkies etc. and it's just off-season talk. When the season talks they'll just use it as a placeholder and a point of reference.

It's not that it doesn't matter, but it's something that's down the line vs something as important as QB. Maybe I should consider other things like pff does like this analytics. But give me a break and that's a million dollar organization and I'm just one dude. I just wanted to prove a point that not all analytics would have us with bad schedule predictions. BECAUSE we have a good QB. That means we'll be in every game at minimum, with our QB winning some of them in the end.

Should I find a way to count other factors like the defenses we're playing against our the weapons the QBs have? I'd love to. But this is a new model. The alternative model I was thinking of was a fantasy football version.

I don't see why it's so controversial. I'm just trying to state a different opinion. One that's mathematically based. So what if it's out there. I don't believe in the air miles metric and the attention is getting. That's what inspired me. Hopefully somebody else liked my work. I enjoyed doing it because it was a break from some stress in my life.

Anybody. Anywhere. Anytime.
Your model is actually less mathematically based then the others though. Their models to use a diet analogy is based on multiple variables lets say if you don't smoke, drink less, eat more broccoli, you will live longer everything being equal. Your model is eat more broccoli, that's it. And in you mind this is a better more inventive way to look at it.

And your version of eat more broccoli is a super simplistic version of even judging that isolated variable. To you, even if its just a hair more broccoli, you will live decades more than the dude who eats a grain less. Small differences = miles of differences in your mind. And that's before even delving into whether your assessment of how much broccoli people eat (QBR) is on the money -- some would argue it isn't on the money.

That's fine. To each their own. I am simply saying when you dismiss the other models and are convinced that yours is slam dunk the best, you are adopting an outlier point. And like I said maybe your outlier point will be proven on the money. Will see. Maybe all these predictive models will be thrown out in the next few years for the QBR is all version you got.

And to extend that same logic that QBR is all maybe guys like Purdy will one day get their due as better QBs than dudes like Mahomes, too. And if people studied the QBR rankings more closely they'd stop their silly QB debates considering there is a ready answer to respond to any QB debate out there. Just google QBR, and the argument is done.

If you want to go after Sharp and his air miles argument. As I mentioned, I'd attack his rest differential argument first. That's really his bigger argument as to an underrated factor that helps or hurts some teams -- not the miles. Miles is a much more minor point from him. But he does think that when the Lions have extra rest days in a pronouced way throughout the season and name that rival division foe has a disadvantage it gives them a minor edge. And minor edges add up.

Sharp like everyone else rides on strength of opponent as the main plot line. That's the main plot. Your beef with him is his minor plots. And on that front, to attack him legitimately, you have to attack his point the way he makes it. That is, make the case that minor differences do not add up in a season where some teams are tight in ability and games are close. He claims a win here and a loss there can make a difference over time.

So to go after Sharp, the argument is the minor stuff is irrelevant. So something like who cares if teams are coming off bye weeks, 4 different times, when we play them. It won't make a difference over time or in any of those games, not a whit. Who cares if we have to go to LA or Madrid versus Baltimore. A team isn't worn down by less rest or more travel. The team is just as fresh traveling up the street to play Baltimore than they are changing time zones and traveling 1000s of miles. It's all the same thing. A team doesn't benefit from more rest let alone it adding up when these variables are multiple over the season. That would be the argument against Sharp who says these subtle things can add up. Your argument to go head to head would be those minor plot lines are 100% meaningless.

And look I got no beef with you enjoying coming up with your own model. That's cool. But you are arguing your model is the better one and saying it in a way where you don't feel its even close. lol, that just comes off a bit arrogant when we are debating that. I got my quirky takes on some football subjects but I try to be aware that they are quirky and I could be wrong. That's all. I know you think yours isn't quirky because who would disagree that the QBs are the most important plot lines. But IMO it is indeed quirky because your point is its the whole plot line, the QBR scores are the be all defintive stat as to any game, and even minor QBR differences mean everything. All of that is very different versus name that same old same old predicitive model.
Post Reply