Leader Posted December 11, 2019 Author Share Posted December 11, 2019 Just now, AlexGreen#20 said: You think a person with a stopwatch is accurate to a hundredth of a second? You would be lucky to get within a tenth of a second. They have electronic digital stopwatches that carry out two decimal places. The person simply needs to hit "start" - "stop" - and look at the data. Is that possible? Yes. I see no reason it couldnt be done and be representative of how quickly a given QB is releasing the ball on a pass play. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 11 minutes ago, waterfish_21 said: I remember in college having to write a program that broke a video down by frames. It could do things like calculate time between frames, wasn't 100% accurate but was considered pretty close. This was used on videos on youtube. Used a bit of open source code as well, very simple stuff. The hardest part, not difficult, just time consuming and most likely inaccurate/inconsistent, would be finding the frame at which you start and stop the calculation. But PFF supposedly has people that do this stuff all day anyways, so who knows. Sure, in a lab setting you could take the all-22, upload it to a video player with clearly visible time stamps, go frame by frame and pray like hell you've got the exact frame where the ball moves off the line and the exact frame it's out of the QB's hand, and do it that way. But average TV is 30 Frames per Second. So unless you're using specialized cameras, you don't even have hundredth of a second resolution on the damn cameras you're filming with Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 8 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: You think a person with a stopwatch is accurate to a hundredth of a second? You would be lucky to get within a tenth of a second. I can attest. One of the tests I run is a penetration test (golddust.gif). I have to time a needle being pushed by a weight for 5.0 seconds. Extremely accurate, I tell you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 5 minutes ago, Leader said: They have electronic digital stopwatches that carry out two decimal places. The person simply needs to hit "start" - "stop" - and look at the data. Is that possible? Yes. I see no reason it couldnt be done and be representative of how quickly a given QB is releasing the ball on a pass play. It's not about the damn stopwatch, though that's another element of uncertainty. The person hitting start and stop isn't going to be anywhere close to a hundredth of a second. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 You can probably get reasonably good accuracy and precision at about the tenth of a second range. Take a stopwatch and try to stop it at 1.00 seconds. It is possible. But it is very, very difficult, and largely luck based. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted December 11, 2019 Author Share Posted December 11, 2019 Just now, AlexGreen#20 said: It's not about the damn stopwatch, though that's another element of uncertainty. The person hitting start and stop isn't going to be anywhere close to a hundredth of a second. My work is done here. I've provided you the data and thru subsequent discussion a means and method it could be done. I've also said multiple times I dont know if thats actually how its being done...just the most likely method. You're "arguement" isnt with me. If you truly feel PFF (a fairly large and reputable stat platform) is putting out bogus analytical data to the industry....thats fine. I'll not try to convince you otherwise. Outside of declaring the data (and organization) bogus, you can however contact them directly to ask. Thats your choice. I just provided the info for consideration. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fl0nkerton Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 isn't PFF largely considered bologna anyways? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 1 minute ago, Leader said: My work is done here. I've provided you the data and thru subsequent discussion a means and method it could be done. I've also said multiple times I dont know if thats actually how its being done...just the most likely method. You're "arguement" isnt with me. If you truly feel PFF (a fairly large and reputable stat platform) is putting out bogus analytical data to the industry....thats fine. I'll not try to convince you otherwise. Outside of declaring the data (and organization) bogus, you can however contact them directly to ask. Thats your choice. I just provided the info for consideration. You have not provided a means and method it could be done. The method you've provided is wholly insufficient for providing that degree of accuracy. And PFF is not a reputable statistics organization. It's not audited. It doesn't have publicly available information regarding means and methods. There is no governmental or private certification of their statistical work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragnar Danneskjold Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 30 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: It's not about the damn stopwatch, though that's another element of uncertainty. The person hitting start and stop isn't going to be anywhere close to a hundredth of a second. Yet we are willing to accept pro day 40 times that are hand held watches? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fl0nkerton Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 Just now, Ragnar Danneskjold said: Yet we are willing to accept pro day 40 times that are hand held watches? Anyone who looks at Pro Day #'s takes it with a grain of salt. Or should, at least. Combine #'s are laser-timed iirc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 1 minute ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said: Yet we are willing to accept pro day 40 times that are hand held watches? 40 times are laser timed and nobody with a brain in their head doesn't think there's a +/- at least .07 seconds on those times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fl0nkerton Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 Quote All departing U-M players with pro aspirations worked out for NFL scouts at U-M's Glick Field House today and, though it was off-limits to the media, Michigan shared a few insights, most notably from Funchess. He was clocked at a 4.48 40-yard dash, much better than the 4.75 he ran at the NFL combine. Funchess sucks, but this is a huge difference lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 The things people will argue about lol. There's no way any of you know how they do it so you're all talking out of your ....... The stat exists, use it or don't. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBURGE Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 17 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: The things people will argue about lol. There's no way any of you know how they do it so you're all talking out of your ....... The stat exists, use it or don't. Just a new thing to argue about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathstar Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 58 minutes ago, Fl0nkerton said: isn't PFF largely considered bologna anyways? Mostly when it doesn’t fit someone’s argument. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.