Why is it credible? None of their own staff even knows the algorithm built to determine what was a success and what was a failure. How can anything be credible when an entire analysis is admittedly build on a number that nobody that is on payroll is privy to the process? It's nothing but a talking point.
I enjoy reading the player ranking and attempting to revease engineer them but frankly I get stumped. Games when Larry Fitzgerald catches 8 of 11 balls thrown to him for 190 yards and 2 td's and he gets ranked middle of the wrong pack. Games where Teddy Bridgewater throwing or running for no td's and goes 11-16 with 170 yards gets him at the top of lists. It's mind boggling trying to determine the variables.
As a smart man, I get frustrated when I'm told to trust an algorithm that makes no sense. I get frustrated when theit analysis is given as facts when the columnists giving them admit to not being told the measure. Very little in game analysis is given.
If you trust the smoke and lights go ahead. It works for Oz but there is a dude behind the curtain making a ton of Jack off what we can only use a a fun, content filler.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/20/2016 06:09AM by no name.
