17 Oct 2004, 09:37pm by admin
In the first half of his guest column on offensive pace, Jim Armstrong showed that a faster or slower pace seems to have absolutely no connection with winning more games or even scoring more points. In part two, Jim looks at competing theories about how teams should change their pace. Should teams find the pace that works for their offense and stick with it, or should they specifically slow down against stronger opponents?
4 comments, Last at 27 Mar 2007, 12:47am by online new car buying
13 Oct 2004, 10:35pm by admin
Pace is a popular subject in NBA analysis, but what about the NFL? Are there any strategic elements to setting the pace? Does a so-called "ball control" offense really help when a team is overmatched? Jim Armstrong explores these issues in a two-part guest column. In part one, which were the fastest and slowest teams in 2003, and does a faster or slower pace help a team to win?
6 comments, Last at 08 Jan 2008, 2:52pm by DavidH
04 Oct 2004, 12:04pm by P. Ryan Wilson
Ben Roethlisberger and Carson Palmer are both in their first year as starting quarterbacks. Therefore, the Steelers and Bengals are both destined for losing seasons. Right? Nope. Ryan Wilson explains why a quarterback's experience may factor into team success less than you think.
2 comments, Last at 01 Feb 2007, 12:41pm by Amatory
15 Sep 2004, 01:18pm by Michael David Smith
Two seasons. 22 Catches. 243 Yards. Is that what you expect out of the second pick in the draft? Injury or not, Michael David Smith says that Charles Rogers was just another big Matt Millen mistake.
01 Sep 2004, 07:02am by Aaron Schatz
When Ricky Williams retired last month, it was thought to be a massive blow to the Miami Dolphins. It was, but only emotionally. The team on the field might actually be better. In this article from Slate.com, Aaron explains why the star running back is the most overrated player in football and makes the case for running back by committee.
31 Aug 2004, 12:54pm by Guest
We're used to seeing strength of schedule listed as the average of last season's records for all 16 opponents. But does that mean anything if last year's opponents were just as good, or bad, as this year's? Anthony Brancato investigates.
30 Aug 2004, 10:03am by P. Ryan Wilson
Some officials call more penalties than others, as Peter King pointed out last April, but does it make a difference? Do teams score more in games where the officials call more penalties? Does the better team win or lose more often when judged by a flag-happy crew? The newest Football Outsider, Ryan Wilson, is on the case.
25 Aug 2004, 02:38am by Guest
Deion Sanders was often criticized for his inability and/or reluctance to make tackles in run support. But like all great cover corners, he wasn't paid to help stop opposing running backs. His job was to keep the other team from throwing to his man, and to deflect or intercept the pass when they dared to challenge him. With this in mind, Michael G. Knight has devised a new statistic that tries to judge a cornerback on more than what he does after his receiver has caught a pass.
23 Aug 2004, 12:33pm by Al Bogdan
The general expectation this season is that the Michael Vick-led Atlanta Falcons will rebound from a terrible 2003. But what really caused the terrible season was the collapse of the Atlanta defense. Is it possible that this defensive decline was connected to Vick's injury, giving Falcon fans hope for 2004? Al asks the question and gets an answer that will surprise you. Actually, it probably won't.
16 Aug 2004, 04:58am by Aaron Schatz
DVOA and DPAR measure the best running backs in terms of value, but what about consistency? Some running backs are always putting their teams in the position to grab another first down, and others are "home run hitters" that mix highlight-reel runs with lots of 2-3 yard carries. Football Outsiders has a new stat that measures how often a running back has success. Originally called "Running Back Batting Average," it is now called "Running Back Success Rate."