Analytics in football
-
My guess... and it's only a guess... is that analytics has broken down the chances of success of playcalls in every down and distance situation. Then it's a pretty simple matter of seeing how a playcaller stacks up. Only one aspect of a HC evaluation, but feel for the game is an important one.
Other aspects... leadership, trustworthiness, communication skills, etc. ... would seem to have to be evaluated the old fashioned way, legwork and face-to-face.
Problem is, the last stuff you mentioned really can't be quantitated. So in the end, it just boils down to gut feeling if it's the "right guy".
I have no feeling one way or the other about Stefanski this go around, it's all about wins. And if Kevin doesn't win right out of the gate, its going to be a real short honeymoon with the fans and the shouts from the peanut gallery for Haslam to sell out are going to be deafening. MHO. So Jimmy is trying for (I hope the last time) to assemble a coaching staff where they can all sit around the campfire, toast marshmallows and sing kumbaya. I hope it works. I'm getting mighty tired shelling out money for season tickets to watch the unending clown show Haslam offers up year after year.
Problem is, the last stuff you mentioned really can't be quantitated. So in the end, it just boils down to gut feeling if it's the "right guy".
I have no feeling one way or the other about Stefanski this go around, it's all about wins. And if Kevin doesn't win right out of the gate, its going to be a real short honeymoon with the fans and the shouts from the peanut gallery for Haslam to sell out are going to be deafening. MHO. So Jimmy is trying for (I hope the last time) to assemble a coaching staff where they can all sit around the campfire, toast marshmallows and sing kumbaya. I hope it works. I'm getting mighty tired shelling out money for season tickets to watch the unending clown show Haslam offers up year after year.
Some of it has to be gut, but in many ways that is the least important as compared to the person stands the best chance of putting us in to a good play based on situation. It's like playing blackjack. The player who makes the solid decisions stands a good chance of winning. It doesn't always work out that way. You can make the call that statically says you have a 70% chance at a positive result, but you still have a 30% chance it won't. The measure in this case isn't the result. The measure is did he put us in to a play that had a good or best chance of working? That is all you can hope for.
Like you, I am tired as well. See you next year...lol
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
Deja Vu all over again. Didn't we have this conversation like 3 years ago?
Even if we did it's more important now if our head coach was selected through the process.
WSS
Even if we did it's more important now if our head coach was selected through the process.
WSS
Well, maybe. Though personally I put no importance on it.....other than to say, no matter what process was used, can we just get a fucking guy to come in here and win...no matter how!
-
My guess... and it's only a guess... is that analytics has broken down the chances of success of playcalls in every down and distance situation. Then it's a pretty simple matter of seeing how a playcaller stacks up. Only one aspect of a HC evaluation, but feel for the game is an important one.
Other aspects... leadership, trustworthiness, communication skills, etc. ... would seem to have to be evaluated the old fashioned way, legwork and face-to-face.
Problem is, the last stuff you mentioned really can't be quantitated. So in the end, it just boils down to gut feeling if it's the "right guy".
I have no feeling one way or the other about Stefanski this go around, it's all about wins. And if Kevin doesn't win right out of the gate, its going to be a real short honeymoon with the fans and the shouts from the peanut gallery for Haslam to sell out are going to be deafening. MHO. So Jimmy is trying for (I hope the last time) to assemble a coaching staff where they can all sit around the campfire, toast marshmallows and sing kumbaya. I hope it works. I'm getting mighty tired shelling out money for season tickets to watch the unending clown show Haslam offers up year after year.
So Jimmy is trying for (I hope the last time) to assemble a coaching staff where they can all sit around the campfire, toast marshmallows and sing kumbaya. I hope it works. I'm getting mighty tired shelling out money for season tickets to watch the unending clown show Haslam offers up year after year.
Do you think that would work? I mean, we have to try something. I mean, it could end up being like this.....watch some of it.. They sing Kumbaya, and then giggle for 3 minutes. That could be how our FO ends up:
-
My guess... and it's only a guess... is that analytics has broken down the chances of success of playcalls in every down and distance situation. Then it's a pretty simple matter of seeing how a playcaller stacks up. Only one aspect of a HC evaluation, but feel for the game is an important one.
Other aspects... leadership, trustworthiness, communication skills, etc. ... would seem to have to be evaluated the old fashioned way, legwork and face-to-face.
Problem is, the last stuff you mentioned really can't be quantitated. So in the end, it just boils down to gut feeling if it's the "right guy".
I have no feeling one way or the other about Stefanski this go around, it's all about wins. And if Kevin doesn't win right out of the gate, its going to be a real short honeymoon with the fans and the shouts from the peanut gallery for Haslam to sell out are going to be deafening. MHO. So Jimmy is trying for (I hope the last time) to assemble a coaching staff where they can all sit around the campfire, toast marshmallows and sing kumbaya. I hope it works. I'm getting mighty tired shelling out money for season tickets to watch the unending clown show Haslam offers up year after year.
Problem is, the last stuff you mentioned really can't be quantitated.
Not only that, but it can't be "quantified"....
There can be some "science" in today's interviewing approaches, but it's psychological, "soft science". Questions can be clustered to probe certain qualities an employer is looking to test, but in the end candidate evaluations are subjective.
Less used, but even more effective are some scenario "exercises" that can test candidates. One is very effective for looking at time management/ organizational skills. It involves replacing someone who after a prolonged absence will not be returning to work. The candidate is put in the departed's office, stacked with a backlog of workflow of varying importance and urgency. How quickly and accurately he sorts thru the backlog is measured.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Problem is, the last stuff you mentioned really can't be quantitated. So in the end, it just boils down to gut feeling if it's the "right guy".
I have no feeling one way or the other about Stefanski this go around, it's all about wins. And if Kevin doesn't win right out of the gate, its going to be a real short honeymoon with the fans and the shouts from the peanut gallery for Haslam to sell out are going to be deafening. MHO. So Jimmy is trying for (I hope the last time) to assemble a coaching staff where they can all sit around the campfire, toast marshmallows and sing kumbaya. I hope it works. I'm getting mighty tired shelling out money for season tickets to watch the unending clown show Haslam offers up year after year.
Some of it has to be gut, but in many ways that is the least important as compared to the person stands the best chance of putting us in to a good play based on situation. It's like playing blackjack. The player who makes the solid decisions stands a good chance of winning. It doesn't always work out that way. You can make the call that statically says you have a 70% chance at a positive result, but you still have a 30% chance it won't. The measure in this case isn't the result. The measure is did he put us in to a play that had a good or best chance of working? That is all you can hope for.
Like you, I am tired as well. See you next year...lol
Some of it has to be gut, but in many ways that is the least important as compared to the person stands the best chance of putting us in to a good play based on situation. It's like playing blackjack. The player who makes the solid decisions stands a good chance of winning. It doesn't always work out that way. You can make the call that statically says you have a 70% chance at a positive result, but you still have a 30% chance it won't. The measure in this case isn't the result. The measure is did he put us in to a play that had a good or best chance of working? That is all you can hope for.
Like you, I am tired as well. See you next year...lol
We should just then get James Holzhauer to run the team. I mean, this is a guy that takes big risks, and is right like 98% of the time:
-
Problem is, the last stuff you mentioned really can't be quantitated.
Not only that, but it can't be "quantified"....
There can be some "science" in today's interviewing approaches, but it's psychological, "soft science". Questions can be clustered to probe certain qualities an employer is looking to test, but in the end candidate evaluations are subjective.
Less used, but even more effective are some scenario "exercises" that can test candidates. One is very effective for looking at time management/ organizational skills. It involves replacing someone who after a prolonged absence will not be returning to work. The candidate is put in the departed's office, stacked with a backlog of workflow of varying importance and urgency. How quickly and accurately he sorts thru the backlog is measured.
Not only that, but it can't be "quantified"....
There can be some "science" in today's interviewing approaches, but it's psychological, "soft science". Questions can be clustered to probe certain qualities an employer is looking to test, but in the end candidate evaluations are subjective.
Less used, but even more effective are some scenario "exercises" that can test candidates. One is very effective for looking at time management/ organizational skills. It involves replacing someone who after a prolonged absence will not be returning to work. The candidate is put in the departed's office, stacked with a backlog of workflow of varying importance and urgency. How quickly and accurately he sorts thru the backlog is measured.
No doubt. You are being tested when you go in to Wal-Mart to fill out a application at their employment center computer kiosk. It records how fast you typed and when you backed spaced to correct spelling, etc. It's used everywhere. Just another tool for companies to better gauge your intelligence
-
Not only that, but it can't be "quantified"....
There can be some "science" in today's interviewing approaches, but it's psychological, "soft science". Questions can be clustered to probe certain qualities an employer is looking to test, but in the end candidate evaluations are subjective.
Less used, but even more effective are some scenario "exercises" that can test candidates. One is very effective for looking at time management/ organizational skills. It involves replacing someone who after a prolonged absence will not be returning to work. The candidate is put in the departed's office, stacked with a backlog of workflow of varying importance and urgency. How quickly and accurately he sorts thru the backlog is measured.
No doubt. You are being tested when you go in to Wal-Mart to fill out a application at their employment center computer kiosk. It records how fast you typed and when you backed spaced to correct spelling, etc. It's used everywhere. Just another tool for companies to better gauge your intelligence
No doubt. You are being tested when you go in to Wal-Mart to fill out a application at their employment center computer kiosk. It records how fast you typed and when you backed spaced to correct spelling, etc. It's used everywhere. Just another tool for companies to better gauge your intelligence
If typing speed and accuracy = intelligence, then I'm fucked...
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Some of it has to be gut, but in many ways that is the least important as compared to the person stands the best chance of putting us in to a good play based on situation. It's like playing blackjack. The player who makes the solid decisions stands a good chance of winning. It doesn't always work out that way. You can make the call that statically says you have a 70% chance at a positive result, but you still have a 30% chance it won't. The measure in this case isn't the result. The measure is did he put us in to a play that had a good or best chance of working? That is all you can hope for.
Like you, I am tired as well. See you next year...lol
We should just then get James Holzhauer to run the team. I mean, this is a guy that takes big risks, and is right like 98% of the time:
We should just then get James Holzhauer to run the team. I mean, this is a guy that takes big risks, and is right like 98% of the time:
He understands how to play that game. Similar to my bring up Blackjack.
Depo isn't a coach, but he does understand sports. He can identify the qualities top performers have/had and compare those to prospective hires.
Again, it's just playing the percentages. To me, playing the percentages makes more sense than going on a gut feeling, but that's just me. Doofus went with his get feeling and it turned out to be the worst decision of his life. I feel bad for the guy.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
No doubt. You are being tested when you go in to Wal-Mart to fill out a application at their employment center computer kiosk. It records how fast you typed and when you backed spaced to correct spelling, etc. It's used everywhere. Just another tool for companies to better gauge your intelligence
If typing speed and accuracy = intelligence, then I'm fucked...
If typing speed and accuracy = intelligence, then I'm fucked...
No, it helps for placement. You might still be able to be a overnight stocker. Maybe not a cashier or some type of management candidate.
-
We should just then get James Holzhauer to run the team. I mean, this is a guy that takes big risks, and is right like 98% of the time:
He understands how to play that game. Similar to my bring up Blackjack.
Depo isn't a coach, but he does understand sports. He can identify the qualities top performers have/had and compare those to prospective hires.
Again, it's just playing the percentages. To me, playing the percentages makes more sense than going on a gut feeling, but that's just me. Doofus went with his get feeling and it turned out to be the worst decision of his life. I feel bad for the guy.
He understands how to play that game. Similar to my bring up Blackjack.
Depo isn't a coach, but he does understand sports. He can identify the qualities top performers have/had and compare those to prospective hires.
Again, it's just playing the percentages. To me, playing the percentages makes more sense than going on a gut feeling, but that's just me. Doofus went with his get feeling and it turned out to be the worst decision of his life. I feel bad for the guy.
We shall see. If just playing the percentages gets us to a place where following your gut feeling did not.
-
He understands how to play that game. Similar to my bring up Blackjack.
Depo isn't a coach, but he does understand sports. He can identify the qualities top performers have/had and compare those to prospective hires.
Again, it's just playing the percentages. To me, playing the percentages makes more sense than going on a gut feeling, but that's just me. Doofus went with his get feeling and it turned out to be the worst decision of his life. I feel bad for the guy.
We shall see. If just playing the percentages gets us to a place where following your gut feeling did not.
We shall see. If just playing the percentages gets us to a place where following your gut feeling did not.
True. Thought I think we were so under coached, we have to be better.
Plus, Freddie didn't really select his coordinators, did he? I think John had a big role in that.
John brought in some excellent skill players. Foundation players not so much.
Math proves everything, and I am as anti-math as it gets. I don't think that way, except when playing cards and investing. Go with percentages, it gives you the best odds. Like I said, it can still come out wrong, buy you are never wrong going with the choice that gives you the best odds for a positive outcome.
-
No doubt. You are being tested when you go in to Wal-Mart to fill out a application at their employment center computer kiosk. It records how fast you typed and when you backed spaced to correct spelling, etc. It's used everywhere. Just another tool for companies to better gauge your intelligence
If typing speed and accuracy = intelligence, then I'm fucked...
-
Analytics is a fancy work for proctology, so when all else fails in selecting a HC, just pull a name out of your ass. Listen closely as Eddie says Stefanski. ?
-
si to the rescue....
==================================================================================================
It's About Time The Browns Joined Football's Modern Age
Pete Smith
17 hours ago
In the wake of hiring Kevin Stefanski as the head coach of the Cleveland Browns, there's been a bunch of excellent reporting delving into the process that went into the hire as well some of the details that are going to come as a result. One of the areas that has been mentioned is the notion of Paul DePodesta's analytics department being involved in game planning, which is to say the coaching staff will be providing them with game plans.
https://twitter.com/DustinFox37/status/1216510921947914240As mentioned by Dustin Fox of 92.3 The Fan, the coaching staff would provide game plans to the analytics department and have some meetings with them before games. This is not only smart, but should be expected from a team that is worth over $1 billion that is trying to compete each and every week, because other teams are already doing it.
While this is being interpreted as micromanagement, it's actually an incredibly supportive role that just becomes an extension of the coaching staff and only helps them as well as players become more prepared before as well as during the game.
A coach provide the analytics department a gameplan. That department then provides relevant data to help both the coaches and players, going along with their film work. For example, if the Browns are planning to use a specific personnel group on offense, the analytics department is going to provide them with as much information as possible as it relates to what the defense has shown up to that point.
Defenses are lining up certain ways, depending on down and distance, their likelihood to blitz, where they tend to blitz, what type of coverages they are likely to run, their specific tendency for dealing with a primary receiver, so on and so forth. They would also provide some self scouting information such as how often they are successful in that personnel group, which formations they've experienced the most success and particular plays or players that have excelled.
They aren't telling the coaching staff what to do, but are simply giving them data, so when they are deciding, they are able to make an informed decision, assuming they choose to use it. Being less reliant on a gut instinct and feeling more confident in decisions because there's information saying it's a prudent decision is beneficial and improves time management.
The meetings that would happen before the game would largely be for the analytics department to make sure they have all the relevant data the coaching staff wants. In other words, at no point in the game are they caught flat footed, unable to provide desired information to a coach. This is no different from what coaches meetings discuss before games; making sure they have everything covered, so they can be prepared during the game. The analytics department is simply a support staff that is trying to anticipate the needs of the coaching staff, so they can focus entirely on beating the opponent rather than searching for information.
During a game, Kevin Stefanski will have access to his coaches through his headset, but he also effectively has access to the internet and a team of people willing to get him whatever he wants at a moment's notice. While coaches are talking to the offense on the sideline, the analytics department is gathering information that's relevant for what they are discussing in the moment as well as information for the next drive.
An effective analytics department during the game acts effectively as a coaching staff's personal assistant. They take care of some of the tasks the coach doesn't want to do during the game, so they can focus on on the critical decisions they were hired to make. At times, the data going to be a factor at all, but there are times when that extra set of eyes and hands specifically geared to make the coach's job easier are going to make a huge difference.
Any number of successful teams do this, but the Baltimore Ravens and Philadelphia Eagles are quite public about their willingness to embrace data in games. They are operating on the cutting edge while anyone who isn't embracing this type of data is at a disadvantage. The fact the Browns weren't doing this before is what should be of concern. They are coming at this and adapting late, which given their results for the past few decades, shouldn't come as a surprise.
=======================================================================================================================
... or as Billy Beane put it... "Adapt or die, bitches"...
Actually I added the "bitches"...
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
We’ll just see
-
I always wondered about the validity of analytics, at least with regard to football players and in relation to analytics as used to evaluate baseball players. The point of it all is to gauge success rates to opportunities. The opportunities in baseball are much much higher in baseball than football.
If a batter sees 5 pitches each PA and gets 4 PAs per game, over a week of time that equates to 140 opportunities to hit a baseball. Jarvis Landry had 83 receptions on 138 targets last year, roughly the same amount of opportunities as the baseball player had in one week.
In a football player’s career they will likely have less opportunities than a baseball player will have in just one year, so l can’t help but wonder how reliable that data is?
-
No doubt. You are being tested when you go in to Wal-Mart to fill out a application at their employment center computer kiosk. It records how fast you typed and when you backed spaced to correct spelling, etc. It's used everywhere. Just another tool for companies to better gauge your intelligence
If typing speed and accuracy = intelligence, then I'm fucked...
-
Me too Tour, me too! LOL
Mike
My new computer is so fast it makes me think maybe I'm getting faster. But analytics proves it's just the computer. ??
-
Anal-Litticks sounds as stupid to me now.. As when I first heard of it.. You can't measure heart or desire with it... To me.. It sounds like Corporate hogwash..
Nickers...."There are no old running QB's in the NFL "~Sam Rutigliano~ -
si to the rescue....
==================================================================================================
It's About Time The Browns Joined Football's Modern Age
Pete Smith
17 hours ago
In the wake of hiring Kevin Stefanski as the head coach of the Cleveland Browns, there's been a bunch of excellent reporting delving into the process that went into the hire as well some of the details that are going to come as a result. One of the areas that has been mentioned is the notion of Paul DePodesta's analytics department being involved in game planning, which is to say the coaching staff will be providing them with game plans.
https://twitter.com/DustinFox37/status/1216510921947914240As mentioned by Dustin Fox of 92.3 The Fan, the coaching staff would provide game plans to the analytics department and have some meetings with them before games. This is not only smart, but should be expected from a team that is worth over $1 billion that is trying to compete each and every week, because other teams are already doing it.
While this is being interpreted as micromanagement, it's actually an incredibly supportive role that just becomes an extension of the coaching staff and only helps them as well as players become more prepared before as well as during the game.
A coach provide the analytics department a gameplan. That department then provides relevant data to help both the coaches and players, going along with their film work. For example, if the Browns are planning to use a specific personnel group on offense, the analytics department is going to provide them with as much information as possible as it relates to what the defense has shown up to that point.
Defenses are lining up certain ways, depending on down and distance, their likelihood to blitz, where they tend to blitz, what type of coverages they are likely to run, their specific tendency for dealing with a primary receiver, so on and so forth. They would also provide some self scouting information such as how often they are successful in that personnel group, which formations they've experienced the most success and particular plays or players that have excelled.
They aren't telling the coaching staff what to do, but are simply giving them data, so when they are deciding, they are able to make an informed decision, assuming they choose to use it. Being less reliant on a gut instinct and feeling more confident in decisions because there's information saying it's a prudent decision is beneficial and improves time management.
The meetings that would happen before the game would largely be for the analytics department to make sure they have all the relevant data the coaching staff wants. In other words, at no point in the game are they caught flat footed, unable to provide desired information to a coach. This is no different from what coaches meetings discuss before games; making sure they have everything covered, so they can be prepared during the game. The analytics department is simply a support staff that is trying to anticipate the needs of the coaching staff, so they can focus entirely on beating the opponent rather than searching for information.
During a game, Kevin Stefanski will have access to his coaches through his headset, but he also effectively has access to the internet and a team of people willing to get him whatever he wants at a moment's notice. While coaches are talking to the offense on the sideline, the analytics department is gathering information that's relevant for what they are discussing in the moment as well as information for the next drive.
An effective analytics department during the game acts effectively as a coaching staff's personal assistant. They take care of some of the tasks the coach doesn't want to do during the game, so they can focus on on the critical decisions they were hired to make. At times, the data going to be a factor at all, but there are times when that extra set of eyes and hands specifically geared to make the coach's job easier are going to make a huge difference.
Any number of successful teams do this, but the Baltimore Ravens and Philadelphia Eagles are quite public about their willingness to embrace data in games. They are operating on the cutting edge while anyone who isn't embracing this type of data is at a disadvantage. The fact the Browns weren't doing this before is what should be of concern. They are coming at this and adapting late, which given their results for the past few decades, shouldn't come as a surprise.
=======================================================================================================================
... or as Billy Beane put it... "Adapt or die, bitches"...
Actually I added the "bitches"...
si to the rescue....
==================================================================================================
It's About Time The Browns Joined Football's Modern Age
Pete Smith
17 hours ago
In the wake of hiring Kevin Stefanski as the head coach of the Cleveland Browns, there's been a bunch of excellent reporting delving into the process that went into the hire as well some of the details that are going to come as a result. One of the areas that has been mentioned is the notion of Paul DePodesta's analytics department being involved in game planning, which is to say the coaching staff will be providing them with game plans.
https://twitter.com/DustinFox37/status/1216510921947914240As mentioned by Dustin Fox of 92.3 The Fan, the coaching staff would provide game plans to the analytics department and have some meetings with them before games. This is not only smart, but should be expected from a team that is worth over $1 billion that is trying to compete each and every week, because other teams are already doing it.
While this is being interpreted as micromanagement, it's actually an incredibly supportive role that just becomes an extension of the coaching staff and only helps them as well as players become more prepared before as well as during the game.
A coach provide the analytics department a gameplan. That department then provides relevant data to help both the coaches and players, going along with their film work. For example, if the Browns are planning to use a specific personnel group on offense, the analytics department is going to provide them with as much information as possible as it relates to what the defense has shown up to that point.
Defenses are lining up certain ways, depending on down and distance, their likelihood to blitz, where they tend to blitz, what type of coverages they are likely to run, their specific tendency for dealing with a primary receiver, so on and so forth. They would also provide some self scouting information such as how often they are successful in that personnel group, which formations they've experienced the most success and particular plays or players that have excelled.
They aren't telling the coaching staff what to do, but are simply giving them data, so when they are deciding, they are able to make an informed decision, assuming they choose to use it. Being less reliant on a gut instinct and feeling more confident in decisions because there's information saying it's a prudent decision is beneficial and improves time management.
The meetings that would happen before the game would largely be for the analytics department to make sure they have all the relevant data the coaching staff wants. In other words, at no point in the game are they caught flat footed, unable to provide desired information to a coach. This is no different from what coaches meetings discuss before games; making sure they have everything covered, so they can be prepared during the game. The analytics department is simply a support staff that is trying to anticipate the needs of the coaching staff, so they can focus entirely on beating the opponent rather than searching for information.
During a game, Kevin Stefanski will have access to his coaches through his headset, but he also effectively has access to the internet and a team of people willing to get him whatever he wants at a moment's notice. While coaches are talking to the offense on the sideline, the analytics department is gathering information that's relevant for what they are discussing in the moment as well as information for the next drive.
An effective analytics department during the game acts effectively as a coaching staff's personal assistant. They take care of some of the tasks the coach doesn't want to do during the game, so they can focus on on the critical decisions they were hired to make. At times, the data going to be a factor at all, but there are times when that extra set of eyes and hands specifically geared to make the coach's job easier are going to make a huge difference.
Any number of successful teams do this, but the Baltimore Ravens and Philadelphia Eagles are quite public about their willingness to embrace data in games. They are operating on the cutting edge while anyone who isn't embracing this type of data is at a disadvantage. The fact the Browns weren't doing this before is what should be of concern. They are coming at this and adapting late, which given their results for the past few decades, shouldn't come as a surprise.
=======================================================================================================================
... or as Billy Beane put it... "Adapt or die, bitches"...
Actually I added the "bitches"...
OK- when I first heard this it was WTF in hell are they going to try now? So teams are now going to play an extremely advanced computerized game of Madden. Except it's for real, in Actual NFL games. This being the case, no wonder McDaniels told the Browns- "No Thanks".
I borrowed this from Dustin Fox's Twitter feed. I'm sure a lot of Browns fans share the sentiment.
Here's Jimmy, Depodesta, and the rest of the analytics team going over the head coaches game plan at the end of the week to give their approval.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login