Giants Upcoming Matchup

Hello All,

Is everyone else as excited as I am for their first week of work in 2009er (Did I catch a niner in there)? As you may know i haven't really worked for the past 2 weeks so this is especially awesome for me.)

On to my point, with the exciting games on Saturday and the shitty, unbearably boring games Sunday we have learned that our beloved Defending Champion New York Football Giants of New Jersey will be playing the Eagles of Philadelphia. Going into this past weekend, I really didn't care who won because I figured the GMen will skull fuck whoever they play anyway. After this weeks games I feel the same way. However, all we are going to hear this week is how the Eagles are going to win, the Eagles are last years Giants, the Eagles beat he Giants in the Meadowlands 4 weeks ago, etc., etc.

FUCK THAT SHIT!!!

And here is why.

First of all, what from that abortion of a game would lead anyone to think that the Eagles could beat the Giants? Was it the one 71 yard screen pass to Westbrook, the inability of T. Jackson to thrown the ball, the ineptitude of Brad Childress (and everyone on Minnesota except Purple Jesus and C. Taylor)? The Eagles played like shit and beat a team that barely beat the Giants 2nd string.

The key to beating the Eagles is running the ball. This is why the Giants lost last time they played: Brandon Jacobs was out. Now, I believe that Derrick Ward can carry the load without Jacobs, but there is no denying that Jacobs is the premier playmaker on this offense. Also, that last game four weeks ago was Week 1 LAB (Life After Burress). So, not only is your best RB out, but your best WR is out too. The Giants are still a very dangerous team without Burress, but they obviously will need some adjustment time to revamp the offensive to work with their personnel.

So the Eagles will now have to come into a very hostile stadium and play a team that is has been resting for pretty much three weeks and has their brusier of a RB back and a passing attack that will be brand new to them.

The only thing that startles me a little is Antonio Pierce. He has been getting torched all season by various TE and RB, including Westbrook (Note: middle LB needs to be addressed in the first round of this years draft). I think that he will probably give up a few plays, but I fully expect the Giants offense to be too much for the Eagles to handle.

Will's Prediction:
GMen 27
Eagles 17

Other Writers' Average Prediction:
Gmen 10
Eagles 198

A Better Stat For Running Backs

Let's say you are an NFL coach, and you have a running back that gains 100 yards on 25 carries and you could choose how to distribute those yards over those carries. You could have him break an 80 touchdown run, but then he would only have gained 20 yards on those other 24 carries, thereby completely bogging your offense down. The best use of those 100 yards would be to distribute them as evenly as possible, in this case being 4 yards for carry. The reason being...

Aaaand I fucking shit you not, right as I'm typing this up (ask Sampson), FOX runs a graphic breaking down Purple Jesus's 18 rushes for 76 yards by each carry.

-1,-1, 2, 2, 6, 2, 40, 6, 0, 6, 1, 3, 0, 2, 0, 3, 0, 5

It saves me a lot of work, but wow that really steals the thunder of this post. Damn you FOX! How dare you listen in to my conversations with my roommate and instantly create a graphic solely to sabotage my shitty blog post that six people are going to read. Fuck.

Anyway, where was I? Ah, yes, even distribution. An even distribution is optimal because if you are picking up four yards every time, you can pick up a first down at will by running three times (theoretically, obviously picking up 4 yards on 3rd & 4 is not the same as on 1st & 10). You can put your team in good down/distance situations, opening up your offensive options. Simply put, given similar total yards and yards per carry, a guy who consistently picks up yards is more valuable than the one who gets you a few big gains but many short runs.

For the sake of argument, I'll say that 4 yards is the cutoff for a "valuable run" (VR). You run for 3 yards 3 times and you still have 4th & 1, so I think you've gotta round up. Look again at PJ's carries again. Out of 18, only 5 of them were VRs. Using the easy method of calculating yards per carry, he's averaging 4.2 YPC. Slightly better than my arbitrary determination of valuable.

What I propose is that in calculating YPC, have 10 yards be the maximum amount per carry. You can make more specific adjustments based on the distance remaining for a first down, but I really don't feel like laying out the specifics at the moment. You could call the stat something nerdy to piss of sportswriters, like VYPR (Valuable Yards Per Rush). Got a better one? Leave it in the comments?

Now, using my new, awesome and completely original formula (probably not) PJ is only averaging 2.5 yards per carry, well below the 4 yard "valuable" threshold. I don't mean to blaspheme Purple Jesus, I'm just trying to say that the 4.2 YPC somewhat overstates his value in that particular game.

[Update - 7:20pm] I type this whole thing up and Westbrook who had 16 touches for 32 yards before this basically wins the game on a 71 yard screen pass. Seem familiar, Giants fans?

[Update - 7:34pm] Wow, after TJack does a great job of reinforcing negative black QB stereotypes by throwing a bunch of shitty passes then breaking a huge run, a fumbled snap essentially ends the game. That was anti-climactic and the fucking Eagles won. I was a much happier person when I started writing this post.

Note: 20th Century FOX assumes responsibility for all cursing in this post.