Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

22 Dec 2008

2008 Quick Reads: Week 16

This week: Derrick Ward has one of the all-time great no-touchdown games, Peyton Manning passes Kurt Warner for second place in passing DYAR, and somebody very unexpected has the second-best game of the DVOA Era at his position.

Posted by: Bill Barnwell on 22 Dec 2008

52 comments, Last at 26 Dec 2008, 12:37pm by Schuyler


by Spoon :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 7:13pm

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the "D" in DYAR and DVOA stands for "defense-adjusted", correct? So when Peyton Manning is the slam dunk leader in your own defense-adjusted statistic for Week 16, and moves into second place on the year, does it make any kind of sense to say "yeah, but he's playing easy opponents"?

You've supposed to have already corrected for that, haven't you? And yet even with your adjustment for playing against the Bengals, Lions and Jaguars, Peyton still ranked second, second and first, respectively, in each of those weeks. If the MVP bandwagon is picking up steam, it's because Peyton is legitimately playing as well as anyone in the league right now.

by Greg (not verified) :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 7:17pm

Don't say that, Ben Riley might come to your house and beat you up.

by Ben Riley :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 7:35pm

Don't get me wrong, I love passing out beatdowns, but as I said in Audibles, Manning deserves to be in the MVP conversation, annoying as it may be (to me, anyway).

by galactic_dev :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 3:00am

Exactly. I don't think (correct me if I'm wrong) that DVOA or DYAR gives Peyton bonus points for those great passing stats (especially last game) when they couldn't run at all.

by Jacob Stevens (not verified) :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 7:38pm

That's exactly how I feel in every way, but the predicition mentioned was that mainstream analysis would start to mention his return to elite-performing QBs in the 2nd half of the year, without consideration of the differential between early and late season opponents.

It's hard to write those little nuggets, I'm sure, without referencing something in a way that doesn't constitute further elaboration, like it does here. The comment might be a little contrite, but the prediction was accurate, and worth mentioning.

by Spoon :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 8:09pm

You're correct: I recall reading the prediction in question back at midseason, and to FO's credit they were absolutely right. But only pointing out the weak opposition is not the whole story, and in its own way is just as short-sighted as ignoring the opposition completely. If you're going to claim that your statistics are more accurate and reliable because they're defense-adjusted, you can't turn around imply that a player's adjusted numbers shouldn't impress because they came against weak competition. If that's the case, why bother with the DYAR or DVOA systems at all?

Maybe the comment just comes across as snarky in print and wasn't truly meant that way, you never can tell online, but it sure struck me as dismissive. Consider that we were told Philip Rivers completed nine passes in a row, but nary a mention of Peyton completing his first seventeen passes of the game.

by Omroth-UK (not verified) :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 7:54pm

Oh come on, correcting for "bad defense" is hardly the easiest thing in the world. That's "interacting with other players", which as has been said many time is precisely what makes this shit hard to begin with.

So what if team X has a -y% defensive DVOA. Is that bad tackling or bad coverage? Sometimes you need the subjective commentary.

by Joseph :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 3:17am

Is it fair to say that if the Saints would have had an accurate kicker in a couple of games, and DB's who wouldn't commit DPI on 50-yd "let's-chuck-it-as-far-as-we-can-and-hope-for-the-best" throws late in the 4th Q/overtime, Drew Brees would be the shoo-in for MVP?

by Spoon :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 8:14am

I think so. My impression of the football awards is that Offensive Player of the Year is given to the guy with the best statistics, while you generally need to have had some team success to win MVP, fair or unfair. Brees should be a shoo-in for OPOY, no question about it, and if the Saints were at least in contention for a playoff spot instead of last in their division then he would probably be my MVP as well.

by andrew :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 7:32pm

Visanthe Shiancoe played easily the best game of his career in a losing effort Sunday...

by dbt :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 8:11pm

Considering the caliber of WR and QB around Zach Miller in Oakland, it's possible Heath Miller is no better than the 3rd best TE named Miller in the NFL right now.

by Key19 :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 8:50pm

Tell me again why it makes sense to trade away the most productive back of the Cowboys' 2008 season? Am I crazy to think that Tashard Choice and Felix Jones starting games with Marion Barber being the closer again would be scary? Also, who says Marion isn't the one to go if someone does? It would solve the toughness "problem." Everyone praises the Earth, Wind, and Fire approach, but Dallas attempting a similar style would be foolish? Why not keep Tashard Choice around at least until his contract is almost up? It's not like Dallas is trying to rebuild an entire team in this upcoming draft... Just a few key positions (like possibly safety, WR, and O-line). Once again, let's give Roy Williams (WR) an offseason with Romo before we throw him (and Jerry) under the bus.

But I guess Barnwell is just banking on Tashard regressing as a runner as time goes on. I mean, CLEARLY having 100+ total yards against the Steelers, Giants, and Ravens is just him being a fluke. We'd better trade him before he starts sucking. Can't play pansy defenses every week like he did against those three, right? And of course Marion and Felix will both never either get injured again, so he'll never see the field in their place. Both of their consecutive start streaks are Favre-like.

by Arkaein :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 11:23am

I think it has less to do with regression (though that is a likely factor that shouldn't be dismissed), and more to do with a limited number of carries to go a round. A good backup RB is very valuable, especially for teams who like to run the ball a lot. A 3rd string RB i really valuable only in the case of injury, or if he offers a skill set not matched by the top 2 guys.

Between Barber and Jones, the Cowboys have the right blend of skills in their top 2 RBs, making Choice a luxury. The draft picks that could be used to fill more significant needs are likely more valuable.

by The Ninjalectual :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 1:14pm

I am a Redskins fan. I hope every day that the Cowboys get rid of Marion Barber for next season. I would like for him to go anywhere except Philly.

by Bill Barnwell :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 8:50pm

The point of my comment wasn't that Manning had a good week or that he's not a great player. He had a great week and he's a great player. My point is that the MVP talk is predicated upon the Colts' winning streak and his recent run, which has a good amount to do with those people who are making said statements ignoring the effect of the opposition he's faced. It's entirely possible that he's a viable candidate even after adjusting for the quality of his opposition.

by Richard :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 10:46pm

Speaking of adjusting for the quality of opposition, I forget if this has been addressed before, but does the defense adjustment for a passing specifically use Pass Defense or just Defense?

by Purds :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 12:09am

You have to admit that it's a pretty stunning omission in both quick reads and the audibles to not mention that Manning had 17 completions in a row, and I think 23 in a row over over two games (one shy of the NFL record). You're telling me if Brady or Cassel did that, we would not have heard about it? Were we constantly reminded last year by FO that Brady was putting up numbers against a horrible division? Of that this year NE has a good record against a terrible schedule?

You guys have a bias, and you might as well admit it, because everyone knows it. And, we don't care that you're biased, except when you try to claim that you're not.

by Bill Barnwell :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 2:35am

I don't know who "You guys" refers to. Me, since I wrote this column? As a Giants fan, I'm incredibly biased towards the Patriots. I admit it.

I gotta say, I think my best job of being totally biased towards the Patriots and against the Colts was when I ignored Manning's completion streaks in the Week 14 Quick Reads:

"Manning's first two passes and his last throw were incomplete. In between, he had streaks of five, eight and 13 straight completions. That's just a supernatural force right there, regardless of how bad the Bengals' pass defense is. It didn't hurt matters that Manning had total peace in the pocket, as the Bengals didn't knock Manning down even once, let alone sack him."

by Rich Conley (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 8:06pm

Bill, don't worry about it. Purds isn't interested in the facts if they don't paint the patriots poorly

by bob (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 2:40am

To his annoyance, Manning completed 17 passes in a row.

Happy now? :)

It's only noticeable this year because in the past, the NFL often was Pats-centric. Talking about the Super Bowl was often a "will the Pats be there and will they win?" proposition. This year they're just another wild card team that nobody expects to see in the SB (or cares that much about, outside their fans).

by DrewTS (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 10:33am

I don't agree that the site as a whole has a bias, but it's pretty obvious that some individuals do. The comment from Ben Riley (not the author of this article) above would be Exhibit A of that.

But I think it's worth asking if that's even such a bad thing. All football fans have biases. They wouldn't be much of a fan if they didn't. Somewhere in this site is a list of the favorite team of each of the contributors, for reference purposes.

by Wanker79 :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 11:03am

I couldn't agree with you more, Drew. If I want completely non-biased information I'll just look at the numbers and ignore everything else. But the whole point of reading the contributing writers commentary is to get their personal opinion. And considering they are all human beings, that opinion is by definition going to be biased in one way or another.

I'm really getting sick of all these whiny little bitches crying about bias. If you don't want to hear any of the opinions of the FO staff, don't friggin' read anything they write. See that link at the top of the page that takes you to the "Statistics"? Bookmark that page and don't bother reading anything else on this site (or any other site for that matter). Just stick to cold, hard facts and you (and everyone else) will be happier.

by E :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 1:25pm

I just want to echo everything Drew and Wanker said. Enough already with the comments about bias! Reading something by Aaron that may be a little Pats-leaning is about 100x more enjoyable than reading comment after comment about FO bias. Yes, they are football fans (I'm sure among the biggest there are) and yes, sometimes their fandom comes through in their writing. Who cares?

What we need is an Irrational Bias Thread where everyone can complain that there's too much emphasis on the Seahawks in audibles or whatever ... then the rest of us can go back to reading the more insighful/interesting comment posts.

PS Bill - no need to respond when people accuse you of being pro-Pats or whatever. It's a waste of your time. There's no need for you to address posts that have no factual basis. We'd rather you respond to posts that ask interesting questions.

by Purds :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 1:32pm

Stop getting your panties in a bunch and calling names. I never complained about them having a bias, but I did complain about their insisting that they don't have a bias. Just be honest.

Let's face it, is Peyton that much better than every other QB out there that his going 17-for-17 to start a game isn't worthy of mention? In that respect, should the MVP only go to guys who do something beyond what we expect?

by King (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 11:00am

I'd say the MVP talk has been predicated upon a mediocre at best defense and absolutely no running game, yet Manning, once in rhythm and healthy, has willed the team to victory regardless of opposition. Let us not forget where this streak started... wins @ Pittsburgh, at home against NE and Houston, and @ San Diego.

by Patrick Bateman (not verified) :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 8:55pm

I'm a little surprised Kevin Boss didn't make the list, but I'm also an unapologetic Giants homer who nearly froze his toes off at the game last night. Was Boss pedestrian (with a TD) last night, or did he just pick a week chock-full of awesome to put up a great game?

by kevinNYC (not verified) :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 9:30pm


I don't think the "trade Choice" comments are a slight in any way. It's an attempt to get a return for Choice while his value is at it's highest point. Considering how much they gave up for Roy Williams, that might not be such a bad idea. As much as I love Earth, Wind, and Fire, there are very few carries available for Ahmad Bradshaw. On a team that throws more often (DAL), there might be even less for Choice.

Plus, you can't keep them all forever. There is little chance that Derrick Ward will be a Giant after this season.

by BlueStarDude :: Mon, 12/22/2008 - 10:02pm

Come on, the Cowboys are NOT going to get a first or second round pick for Choice.

Beyond that the whole "how much they gave up for Roy Williams" thing is overblown -- they basically just gave up a first and a third (they gave up a sixth as well but will get the first pick of the seventh round from Detroit).

Although there are holes to fill (strong safety) and positions to upgrade or bolster depth, this really isn't a team where a lot of mid to late round players are going to be able to come in and get a spot. Dallas already has a high third round pick from Cleveland and the first pick of the fourth round from Detroit. And they have two fifth round picks to boot.

They need to keep choice and use the mid round picks they have to improve the depth on both lines and find at least one improvement at safety.

by Temo :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 12:39am

I do think there's some room for a nuanced opinion on this. I don't think any rational person can say that the Cowboys have gotten, thus far, a decent return on their investment in Roy Williams. This changes only if Roy Williams' presence somehow wins the Super Bowl for the Cowboys in a tangible way.

On the other hand, those that say that the trade "cripples" the cowboys or even cripples their draft next year are not being very rational either.

by DrewTS (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 11:14am

What do you think they could get for Choice? I think a 1st is expecting too much, but a 2nd doesn't sound that impossible. I guess it depends on who the buyers are, and what else is out there in the draft an free agency. I would think that a team looking to spend a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a running back might be inclined to look to trade it for Choice though. He's shown he can perform fairly well at the NFL level, and he's still young enough not to be used up like a lot of free agent RBs.

I don't think I agree that the "how much they gave up for Roy Williams" thing is overblown. A 1st and 3rd is not chump change, and in exchange they got a player who has provided basically nothing above what they could have gotten from the players they already had. The investment dwarfs the return.

And as you said, "this really isn't a team where a lot of mid to late round players are going to be able to come in and get a spot." They don't need mid- to late-round picks. Those two 5th round picks mean very little. When you're only trying to fill a couple holes, you want that 1st round pick.

by The Ninjalectual :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 1:23pm

Name one team that would be likely to give up even a 3rd round pick for Choice.

by DrewTS (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 3:04pm

I have no idea; that's why I was asking.

The Cowboys gave up a 4th rounder for him, so I don't get why it's such a stretch to see someone giving a 3rd, now that he's got a year of experience, and acquitted himself fairly well in the NFL.

From the perspective of a Colts fan, I wouldn't mind if they gave up a 3rd for a young, somewhat proven back with quickness and pass catching ability, to platoon him with Addai. I'm not expecting a 350-carry "feature" back for a 3rd round pick.

by BlueStarDude :: Wed, 12/24/2008 - 10:42am

Of course, but Dallas is not going to get a first round pick for Choice, they're going to get another mid-round pick (ok, maybe, just maybe, a low second rounder), which they don't need.

Barnwell's original comment was about "recouping the bounty" of the Williams trade: well, the sixth rounder for Detroit's seventh rounder is a wash; the third rounder is "pre-recouped" because Dallas has Detroit's fourth rounder, which being the first pick of that round is equivalent value of a late third rounder. So the only part of the bounty left un-recouped is the first rounder, and they're not getting that, or even a mid-to-high second rounder, for Choice, because he doesn't have that breakaway speed -- if he did, he'd become the starter in Dallas, Barber's new contract be damned.

I don't see anything wrong with having three good RBs. RBs tend to get banged up and miss a few games here or there, especially bruisers like Barber and shifty, fleet-footed guys like Felix Jones. Keeping Choice will help ensure consistency in the run game throughout the season, that's worth more than a third round pick which will inevitably be used, like any draft pick, on a player whose pro abilities are essentially unknown.

And for the people with the sarcastic comments, I'm disagreeing with Barnwell (and the comments above), doesn't mean I hate him, doesn't mean I think he does a bad job. We're still allowed to disagree with FO staff, right? Or is everyone who disagrees now cast into the same lot as those for whom the old DVOA-comment template was created?

by Bill Barnwell :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 12:07am

Barber just signed a new deal. The cap hit for trading Barber would be monstrous. Dealing Choice, who makes $450K or so, is a much more palatable move.

by Temo :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 12:35am

Ok, but now explain, in detail, why you hate the Cowboys, and why every comment you make is specifically geared to passive aggressively insult and degrade this fine franchise.

(do I need a /sarcasm tag here? Unfortunately, I think I do.)

by Jake (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 3:01am

I swear I'm not trying to be a FO hater here, but how was it not mentioned that Manning had the best DYAR game of the year on Thursday? Maybe no one is lighting up the scoreboard like Brady did last year or Manning himself did in '04 but still, 260 DYAR with 272 passing? That's pretty impressive if you ask me.

And as for Manning's case for MVP, I think it's a good one. He's had one of the worst run offenses in the league supporting him this year, and its DVOA will only get worse when the ratings come out tomorrow. The Colts were 1/4 on 3rd downs running, with all of those a 3rd and 1 or 2 (they netted -3 yards on the three misses). And as hard as it is for me to say, Harrison has become a complete liability on the right side. The Colts operate so much better with Gonzalez in there, which was clear Thursday even if he did only have 4 catches for 38 yards. On top of that, the defense has been average at best and as you mentioned, Peyton is second among all quarterbacks in DYAR even though, as all the "experts" say, his stats aren't that great (which I don't really understand...since when has a nearly 4000 yard, 26 TD season not been a good one? I guess he set the bar too high).

How could he not be MVP with all that? And if you still don't think he is, who has a better case? (and please don't say Adrian Peterson).

by Demond Sanders (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 9:43am

I'm with Spoon on this. Manning has dominated Quick Reads for the past 2 months. Now I find out it is because of weak competition? I thought that was the whole point of adjusting for defense?

by DrewTS (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 10:19am

I watched the entire Steelers/Titans game, and I can't imagine how Roethlisberger could have a positive DYAR. As the comment says, he had 5 sacks, 4 fumbles, and 2 picks. I realize that his actual passing numbers look good once you take all that stuff out, but 4 turnovers (plus 2 other fumbles) and 5 sacks versus 26 completions is a pretty rough outing in my book. All I can think is that the "D" portion of DYAR is giving him a HUGE lift. Is the Tennessee defensive adjustment really as high as I think it is?

by RoyFlip (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 10:53am

His magical powers to avoid having a tipped duck caught and picked saved the game for the Giants -- Jon Beason had an interception inside the Panthers' 5-yard line go right through his hands.

According to FO, Eli Manning is once again the only quarterback in the league to have interceptions dropped. Jake Delhomme throws up a prayer that goes through Aaron Ross's hands and that is mentioned as "serendipity" rather than an awful pass/almost intercepted...These plays happen all the time to every other quarterback, but Eli apparently is the only who benefits. Of course, it doesn't help that the play-by-play and color guys refer to any pass that is even touched by a defender as "almost intercepted!!!!!"
I look forward to Eli having 4-5 "almost intercepted!!!!!!" in another Super Bowl win.

by BucNasty :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 3:34pm

He mentioned Eli's and not Delhomme's because this is like the 3rd game in a row that Eli threw up an absolute gift and the defense didn't come down with it. He really does have magical powers.

by panthersnbraves :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 11:20am

If John Kasay hadn't had that hitch, and had made the kick at the end of regulation, would the Giants have faded into obscurity to the levels the Panthers have?

by Keith (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 11:54am

I am Packers fan, so I have no dog in this fight.

I would not read this site if every quarterback was treated the same way: "Eli and Delhomme both had interceptions dropped." The bias makes it interesting. It gives it another look. Why does it matter if the guy writing the article that you are reading has a different opinion? Just read it or do not read it. Getting upset and presenting your opinion makes you look worse as a person. If you do not want their opinion, why would they want yours? Think about your backwards logic before you post.

Cowboys fans: you all whine too much. This site slights your team every week...or something. Jerry Jones made a horrible choice with Roy Williams. Any expert not on this site will tell you that the Lions not having Roy Williams is a good thing; they will not say that the Cowboys having Roy Williams is a good thing. And it would make sense to trade T. Choice. The guy is a pretty good football player, but for most of the year, he got little to no carries. Even Felix got little to no carries in some games in which he was healthy. Trading him for a third and a lower pick would not be a bad move. They can grab another back in the draft to be their third string and provide some suitable depth with the extra picks.

Manning as MVP: MVP stands for Most Valuable Player [to a team]. I would say that right now Manning is that player. No other quarterback does what he does as well as he does it. His stats are not normal gaudy Manning stats, but without him, that team would be a 3-12, 4-11 team, not a 10-5 team. If any one person makes that much difference to any other team, I will field the opinion, but I seriously doubt there is one player in the league that matters that much.

by drobviousso :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 12:59pm

seconded on all counts (except I'm not a Packers fan).

by Lance :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 1:59pm

I don't know if we Cowboy fans whine too much or not. Certainly, no team gets bashed more than any other on a week-by-week basis by FO. This would ordinarily be par for the course and not worth commenting on. However, the FO writers pretend to be better than the typical sports-blog stuff. Truth is, though, that Schatz, Barnwell, etc. are all too happy to throw in Cowboy digs, and it makes their "above the fray" bit look weak.

Oh-- and just because one is a fan of a particular team doesn't mean that one "[has] no dog in this fight" when it comes to chiming in on what FO says or doesn't say about other teams. I can have a Dallas Cowboys star tattooed on my left foot, and that doesn't mean that I have a certain antipathy towards more than a few other teams-- even those outside the NFC East!!

by Keith (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 2:36pm

They do not say that their opinions are above the fray. Their stats are. You are complaining about the human element. Nothing you can do or say will change how they present their opinions, ideas, or biases. A Giants fan is naturally inclined to dislike the Cowboys organization, and probably some of the fans of the team. It is to be expected. Perhaps it is true that every writer here dislikes the Cowboys. It does not take away that the Cowboys are ranked in exactly the same way as every other team on this site. It just means that the writers may not really say anything favorable about the Cowboys, other than what the stats tell them.

Also, the reason I prefaced my first post was so people did not think I was "anti-Cowboy and wanted to stick it to those sorry Cowboys fan." That being said, good day.

by bravehoptoad :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 4:20pm

I don't know, man. The Giants fans would probably say that no one gets bashed more than the Giants on this site. A couple years ago, the Steelers fans would say the same thing.

I'd give you this: the writers here are usually "pulling" for DVOA to be right. DVOA has been down on the Cowboys all year, even when every other sports site was calling them the team to beat in the NFC. You have to admit -- FO was more correct than everyone else. Their predictions about the Cowboys have been pretty good.

It seems clear that if the situation was reversed, and DVOA was thinking the Cowboys were hot stuff, and their win loss record was mediocre, then the writers here would be talking up the Cowboys, the same way they do Philly or Green Bay.

by RoyFlip (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 4:19pm

Getting upset and presenting your opinion makes you look worse as a person. If you do not want their opinion, why would they want yours. Think about your backwards logic before you post.

Whoa, getting upset? Look worse as a person? Think about your backward logic? Sounds like someone's been grading too many term papers and finals. Take a break. Have a little fun. Read the writings of lesser minds and laugh to yourself.

You do make great points. The high horse you mounted to make them wasn't necessary.

by BlueStarDude :: Wed, 12/24/2008 - 10:52am

That's fine -- you think it makes sense to trade Choice. I don't. (In fact it's a terrible, terrible idea to trade a good player for a third round pick -- first round picks are almost crap shoots, mid round picks are even more so.) I have an opinion, and my comment includes an argument for that opinion. That's why comments exist here. Every expressed disagreement with Aaron or Barnwell or whoever is not a personal attack. I'm no FO hater; I've been enjoying this site almost since the beginning, although it hasn't been at the top of its game for the last year or two.

by Jets fan in misery (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 3:44pm

I think Pennington means more to Miami than Manning does to Indy.. Penny turned the franchise around 180o --without a wide receiver!
He is single-handedly carrying his team to 10 , well, maybe 11 wins -- after a 1 win season !

& his number one receiver ? A tight-end that got punted from Dallas .. his other leading receivers? His RUNNING BACKS !

I vote Pennington for MVP - he doesn't play in a dome, he doesn't have a super-bowl winning coach, he doesn't have an all-pro receiver .. heck - from what I'm told his arms are made out of noodles ! All he does is win, baby!

by DrewTS (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 5:08pm


by Demond Sanders (not verified) :: Tue, 12/23/2008 - 4:37pm

Pennington has a running game, JetsFan. 118 yards a game on the ground means he isn't doing it single-handedly.

No offense to Arizona and Tim Hightower, but the Colts have the worst running game in the league. Manning is only getting 77 yards a game on the ground. 3.4 yards per carry isn't going to win many games, but somehow the Colts have won 11.

by Schuyler (not verified) :: Fri, 12/26/2008 - 12:37pm

Count me among the people who finds the comment about Manning's schedule leading to MVP consideration incongruous with the stats they are printing. It does not make sense to say that analysts are failing to account for schedule when your own advanced stats have him leading the league in DYAR and DVOA over that same time frame.