.... FUN STATS AND NASTY DATA..SPORTS.ETC, .... .... ......... ....... .......I WILL USE THIS TO PUT ON SOME FUN STATS I DISCOVERED.........................................................................1)FOOTBALL: Best long-passing seasons?.....I wanted to know who was the best long-passers in history but I had no access to they total records of every pass ever thrown by every player in history. So i tried this: I used my "Sports Encyclopedia: Football" to find a substitute. I used the receivers stats and "averaged them down" until they hit 20.0 yards per completion and mad note of the total passes from the top to get DOWN to that amount. For lesser long passers I used 19.00....George Blanda is my example: There were 50 completions for an average of 24 yds each for 1175 total yds. And 83 completions of 21 yds for 1766 yds total. And 3 of 28 yds each for 83 yds total. And 13 for about 18 yds each for 238 total.. And 12 for about 17 for 200 total....ALL these added together became 161 completions for 3462 total yds at an average of 21.5 yds/completion. Now the next stat was 44 completions of 14 each for 600 total. So using 41 of these 44and 558 of the 600 and averaging them in too I got 199 completions for 3979 yds at the 20.0 I wanted...Check book I mentioned.....Anyway, here is what I got . Now remember, the early 1960s AFL was a new league with high-throwing quarterbacks.;;;;;::::blanda 1961 199, kemp/lamonica 1964 166, hadl 1968 154, namath 1968 147, flores 1963 128, layne 1958 127, snead 1963 123, tittle 1962 117, lamonica 1969 116, morton 1969 116, cook 1969 116, nelsen 1968 114, morrall 65 113, layne 60 107, unitas 1964 107, lamonica 1967 103, van brocklin 1960 103, brown 64 100, morrall 68 100, dawson 71 100, hart/beathard 71 99, jurgensen 1962 96, lamonica 68 92, dawson 68 91, anderson 1975 89, snead 62 88, hadl 1970 88, dawson 1966 87, rote 63 83, tarkenton 68 83, gabriel, hart 1970 82, brodie 1970 81, griese 71 80, tarkenton 74 77, everette 90 77, layne 62 77, staubach 71 75, lamonica 70 75, blanda 60 73, namath 72 72, namath 67 71, tarkenton 1972 71, meredith/lebaron 62 71, fouts 74 70, plum 1958 70, (note the lack of 1990s QBs!), unitas 65 67, taliaferro 69 64, mchan 57 63, starr/mchan 59 62, hadl/rote 1964 61, unitas 60 59, ninowski/morrall 61 59, namath 1969 58, hadl 73 57, simms 90 56, griese 70 56, douglass 72 55, johnson 1963 54, landry 72 53, layne/bukich 61 53, dawson 70 51, kelly 90 51, morrall 57 50, schroeder 1990 54, tarkenton 73 54, spurrier/brodie 72 52, kapp 69 50, meredith/morton 1967 49, morrall 63 50, brown 1957 45, starr 1967 44, owen 74 43, hadl 69 42, thomason 57 40, tittle 1963 40, hunter 72 40, namath 74 40, hart 74 39, cunningham 90 36, snead 1965 35, bradshaw 75 33, harris 74 30, marino 96 28, brodie 71 26, conerly 1958 26, aikman 90 22, unitas/morrall 70 21, ryan 65 19, unitas 1967 14, pastorini 74 14, kemp 1961 14 (Please note that the LAST guys on this list are still in among the best long-passers)(Perhaps Ill do this for passers of the 1997 season to show the difference)...........under construction.. ... ....lots to go......9-30-98..... .................. ................. ............ 2) THIS PAST PHONY SEASON REALLY BOTHERED ME> It was obvious that the LORDS of BASEBALL who have NO respect for the game decided to CREATE a PHONY homerun champion by making it very easy to hit homeruns. So I went back to my Encyclopedia and looked up the league ERAs from 1955-1994. Here is what I found. I put them in categories: 4.80-4.89 ERA (1) al94 ( one year )(american league 1994),.....4.70-4.79 (0),......4.60-4.69 (0),.....4.50-4.59 (0),......4.40-4.49 (1) al87 ,.....4.30-4.39 (1) al 92,.....4.20-4.29 (2) al79 nl94,.....4.10-4.19 (3) al85, al86, al56,.....4.00-4.09 (11)!!!,.....3.90-3.99 (9)!!!,......3.80-3.89 (5),.....3.70-3.79 (10)!!!,.....3.60-3.69 (13)!!!,.....3.50-3.59 (9)!!!,.....3.40-3.49 (8)!!!,.....3.30-3.39 (1) nl67,.....3.20-3.29 (2) nl63 al67 ,..... 3.10-3.19 (0),..... 3.00-3.09 (1) al72,..... 2.90-2.99 (2) nl68, al 68.....Now when one graphs this one gets 1,0,0,0,1,1,2,3,11,9,5,10,13,9,8,1,2,0,1,2, Just look at how dramatic the delineation is.! What that tells you is that the only HONEST stats are between 3.39 and 4.09. Any year above 4.09 is a very biased and rare pro-batter year that should NOT count in the records and any year below 3.39 is a very biased and rare PITCHERS YEAR that should NOT count in the records. Since 1987 the game has been DELIBERATELY BIASED towards the batters to get more people into the stadiums. (The stupider masses like power). I don' yet know what the final ERAs for 1998 are BUT I'll bet they are unbelievably high, phony, and biased towards the batters.... ..... ..... ..... ..... ...... ..... .... 3) 1994 PENN STATE FOOTBALL..... ...... ..... ..... ..... For four years Ive been hearing whining from my fellow Pennsylvanians about PSU not being ranked number one despite a perfect record in 1994. But here is the truth. By definition there are ten teams in the Final Top Ten. Of these ten teams EIGHT of them played one other Top Ten team. ONE tea played an incredible THREE ganes against other Top Ten Teams ( The University of Florida!) and ONE, and only ONE team wound up in the Top Ten without even playing one lousy game against another Top Ten Team. And that team was..(drumroll).. PENN STATE!!!! If you wont even play ONE game againsy another top ten team then how can you expect to be listed on top of all those other top ten teams. The truth is that there should be a rule FORBIDDING a team to finish in the top ten if it did not play even one other top ten team. PSU 1994 should have been ranked number 11!!. But thats always been typical of PSU. They always played nobody (To be fair, there werent any other big football schools in the Northeast for them to play). But their schedule makers were always Machiavellian. Theyd fit in all dinky teams and then if they had to put in a big one theyd make sure it was always after a two week healing period. Thats also why PSU won so many Bowl games. Their opponents would come into the games all beaten up and with star players injured from playing tough schedules and PSU would be unharmed. I pushed for years for PSU to join the Big Ten so they would have to play a real schedule but they immediately made sure the 3 or 4 schools they could select for themselves were even esier. That's why they immediately dropped the PITT rivalry as Pitt was almost half as big as PSU and they preferred an even smaller school now that they were forced to play Big Ten Teams. .... .... ... 10-8-98 ...UNDER CONSTRUCTION 9-30-98 10-7 Just learned latest LEAGUE ERAs ! AL 1998: 4.65, AL 1997: 4.56, NL 1998; 4.23, NL 1997: 4.20. These are RIDICULOUSLY HIGH and should NOT be official years. Missing 1995 and 1996. There were FOUR batters with FIFTY homeruns in 1998. That is crazy.


FIVE SUPERSTAR SEASONS: Using lifetime totals for recommending people to be Hall of Fame candidates is ridiculous yet noone ever seems to question it. It's especially wrong in this day of LONG-LIVED MEDIOCRITIES. A 300 game winner USED to mean someone who averaged 25 wins a year for 12 years (say, Lefty Grove). Now it's just someone who goes 10-10 for 30 years ( say, Nolan Ryan).. A 500 homerun hitter USED to be someone who averaged 40 homers a year for 13 years. Now its someone who averages 20 a year for 25 years. 300 wins and 500 homers USED to represent the BEST superstars in baseball. They no longer do. Now they represent who had the latest medical help and best steroids and vitamins to keep him chuffing along boringly for ages...... .... .... ...... ..... Let's say Mantle quit after 1957. His totals would not have been high. But he had already been a superstar for FIVE of his SEVEN years. Shouldn't that be enough for a nomination? Suppose a pitcher wins FIVE Triple Crowns in a row, hurts his arm, and never pitches again. Should his lack of totals keep him out? He'd probably only have about 125 wins. Should he then be thought equal to a journeyman pitcher who averages 12.5 wins a year for ten years? That's what lifetime totals do. If a batter bats .400 for his first five years and then bats .100 for his next five should he be considered a nobody for his lifetime .250 average? .... ..... ..... ..... ...... Baseball is Not "continuous", it is "continual". So why do we use 'continuous" .... .10-13 under construction more to come ..... ..... ...... ..... ...... ...... ...... ..... ..... ...... http://members.tripod.com/~notttt/index-6.html This was the code in case you like this site and want to post it somewhere so others can find it.



My Snazzy List of Links

Back to main menu.:


This page has been visited times.