Scot1
Registered
I've never started a thread before, but I got pissed off this morning.
The AR's headline was 'Golden proves who's 'nastier', and second head is 'Cardinals' sack artist is team's best pass rusher.'
I hated the decision to let him go several years ago, and was glad he returned to . But 'best pass rusher' is a pretty hasty and disrespectful label--clearly aiming to diss Chandler Jones.
Dana Scott probably doesn't write the headlines, and thank the stars showed more qualified judgment in the article: 'best pass rusher this season, on the numbers.' True in most respects. His sack #s, compared to CJ's, are 9 to 6, per games are 1 to .7, plus his FF are 4 to 2, solo tackles are 18 to 11. Admittedly, CJ has more QB hits, 16 to 13, and equal TFL in two less games played. But Golden deserves high praise, higher than I expected to give him.
But 'team's best pass rusher' implies superiority in an optimal mix of skill, speed, strength, and toughness, plus conditions like double-teams, and half a season is just too data to justify stripping the crown from arguably the NFL's number one over the last 5 years or so.
For perspective, we might help compose an article on 'the team's best passer'--and that's also this year, on the numbers--win % 100 vs. a measly 88, completion % 85 vs. 73, Y/A 9.6 vs. 8.9, and of course TD/Int ratio of, for Murray 17/7 vs. McCoy's fraction = infinity! All reflected in McCoy's highly superior QB rating of 119 vs. 110.
Better hurry, though, before next week fouls the whole story up. [But I don't mean disrespect to Scott, here--he's paid to puff up the focus of his story, neglecting almost everything else.
The AR's headline was 'Golden proves who's 'nastier', and second head is 'Cardinals' sack artist is team's best pass rusher.'
I hated the decision to let him go several years ago, and was glad he returned to . But 'best pass rusher' is a pretty hasty and disrespectful label--clearly aiming to diss Chandler Jones.
Dana Scott probably doesn't write the headlines, and thank the stars showed more qualified judgment in the article: 'best pass rusher this season, on the numbers.' True in most respects. His sack #s, compared to CJ's, are 9 to 6, per games are 1 to .7, plus his FF are 4 to 2, solo tackles are 18 to 11. Admittedly, CJ has more QB hits, 16 to 13, and equal TFL in two less games played. But Golden deserves high praise, higher than I expected to give him.
But 'team's best pass rusher' implies superiority in an optimal mix of skill, speed, strength, and toughness, plus conditions like double-teams, and half a season is just too data to justify stripping the crown from arguably the NFL's number one over the last 5 years or so.
For perspective, we might help compose an article on 'the team's best passer'--and that's also this year, on the numbers--win % 100 vs. a measly 88, completion % 85 vs. 73, Y/A 9.6 vs. 8.9, and of course TD/Int ratio of, for Murray 17/7 vs. McCoy's fraction = infinity! All reflected in McCoy's highly superior QB rating of 119 vs. 110.
Better hurry, though, before next week fouls the whole story up. [But I don't mean disrespect to Scott, here--he's paid to puff up the focus of his story, neglecting almost everything else.
