The thing I don't like about DYAR and the similar DVOA is that they (Football Outsiders) start with actual numbers then mold them based on their own subjective views of certain plays, even some might say to the extent of meeting a pre-determined result.
Also, for all their vaunted statistics, their team DVOA/DYAR calculation hasn't picked the SB winner in 10 years.
Are the Rams really the worst team in the NFL?
Tipsheet thinks not, but we concede the statistics at this point in the team's history aren't pretty. The team's won-loss record over the past 5 years is gruesome, too.
Nobody mentions how Bradford eclipsed the the win total of the Rams previous 3 seasons in his Rookie year.
We, as outsiders to the organisation without a playbook, don't know if a receiver has run an incorrect route, or a blocker has missed an assignment. We don't know if a defender is supposed to be covering a particular receiver or zone. Sure, there are times when these things are obvious, but there are times when they aren't too. Does a pass that falls to no one in the middle of the field count as a bad pass if a receiver is supposed to be there to catch it? How can we say for sure that a sack is down to the QB holding it for too long when we don't know when he is supposed to get rid of the ball? Does Bradford throwing a ball too high for a receiver count against Bradford if the receiver has run his route 5 yards too shallow? Does Bradford get criticised for not connecting on a deep pass because the receiver struggled with a jam at the LOS?
Using the expected result when we don't know the expected result is just poor statistical analysis.
Which is probably why they came to such a ridiculous conclusion :)
I'm not trying to defend the conclusion - I disagree with it. And I'm not really even trying to defend this specific analysis. But I don't think we should constantly trash any analysis that says anything bad about Sam Bradford or any of the other anointed ones without even understanding how the analysis was conducted. I come here for intelligent football talk, not blind cheerleading.
I understand that a large part of the fan psychology is utter devotion to one's team and players to the point of standing up for them, but if our goal as a forum is to elevate the fan experience to more intellectual and, thus, more meaningful levels of discussion and interaction, which I believe it is, then differing opinions shouldn't be marginalized as inferior or nonsensical just because we disagree with the conclusion. And let's not pretend that the conclusion has nothing to do with it, because I haven't seen many people questioning the methods behind Football Outsiders' evaluation of Laurinaitis being underrated.
Me myself, I'm not sure I fully understand F.O.'s DYAR statistic and I'm fine admitting that. But like Gordon said when he prefaced the article, while I don't agree with the claim being made, I have to be honest and admit that Sam's other numbers to this point aren't great. I think there are a lot of factors that go into that, but one of them is Sam not playing up to his ability, and from the articles I've read, that's something Sam would acknowledge as well, so I'm not sure why some fans seem to get disgruntled when a national voice points that out.
Regardless, I'm looking forward to a bounce-back season from Sam, one in which he hopefully improves upon his DYAR numbers and changes Mr. Verhei's mind.