Romo's comment on top 100 players

[Califan007]

There's several old cowboys that have better accolades and are just as if not more deserving of being in the hall of fame than several players that are in it.

There will be 12 cowboy players in the hall of fame when Larry Allen is inducted this year. 12. As many great teams as we have had? That's pathetic.

That's because the Cowboys have only been in the league since 1960. If you only count HOF players that played in or after 1960 the Cowboys may have the most players in the Hall Of Fame of any team in the league.

 

[DFWJC]

I've heard the same about last years. I don't know how many are polled but it doesn't seem like many.

I think it's between 20-40 players in total. So yes, completely a joke.

 

[Idgit]

I think it's between 20-40 players in total. So yes, completely a joke.

I'd bet the responses consist of whichever active players in their network mailing list bother to fill out the 100 question survey when they email it to them. With ~2000 players, total, in the league, how many are going to spend an hour or two ranking players across the whole league? Not too many.

Heck, if we did the same for CZ (not a bad idea, now that I think of it), how many posters would take that kind of time? Think we could get 20 complete responses? It doesn't seem like a big deal coming up with the ranking, but, quick, who are the best 3 players on every team? In some cases, it's obvious, but I'd have a hard time coming up with players for, say, the Jags, without doing some footwork. It's a fair amount of work getting a response from avid fans, much less getting guys who do this for a living to respond during their off seasons.

 

[Echo9]

I found it in an article that talked about the 2013 list. Said 28.3% of the players voted (gave the exact number, but can't remember it).

I can't find anything to back this up, but I heard on a radio show that it was a total of about 35 players TOTAL. If true, that's significantly less than 28.3%

 

[Califan007]

I can't find anything to back this up, but I heard on a radio show that it was a total of about 35 players TOTAL. If true, that's significantly less than 28.3%

Here ya go:

Ideally, all players would do it. This year, the league says only 481 of them actually did. That’s 28.3 percent of all active players.


“All players are given the opportunity to vote through ballots we send to all 32 teams around Thanksgiving,” NFL Network spokesman Alex Riethmiller told PFT via email. “For convenience sake, we try to time it with Pro Bowl balloting, so they can do them together. In addition to ballots collected that way, we also give ballots to many of the players that we interview for our shows. This year, in total, we received 481 votes.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/05/05/inside-the-top-100-voting-process/




Some of Florio's arguments are laughable, but I'm gonna trust that he got the correct number, even if someone on a radio show claims it was only 30 players.

 

[Califan007]

I'd bet the responses consist of whichever active players in their network mailing list bother to fill out the 100 question survey when they email it to them.

They don't fill out a 100 question survey--that would make the list even more useless lol. They fill out their top 20 choices and then the league tabulates the votes, assigning points for where players fall on the ballots that were submitted. Pretty much every year-end list does it this way, from albums to movies to NFL players.

 

[Idgit]

They don't fill out a 100 question survey--that would make the list even more useless lol. They fill out their top 20 choices and then the league tabulates the votes, assigning points for where players fall on the ballots that were submitted. Pretty much every year-end list does it this way, from albums to movies to NFL players.

Seriously? And they just count on there being enough variation to fill out 100 slots? How can that possibly be statistically significant?

I don't doubt you--I've never heard of this one way or another--but it's a horrible way to get a top 100 list. A respondent or two who skips the usual top 20 suspects could make or break inclusion on the list for those bottom 20 spots. They probably don't get more than a couple dozen responses overall, and most of those will be highly multiplicative. That's crazy.


EDIT: Just saw your link. Thanks for posting that.

 

[Califan007]

Seriously? And they just count on there being enough variation to fill out 100 slots? How can that possibly be statistically significant?

If close to 500 players fill out the ballot, there will most definitely be enough variation. The Village Voice top 100 albums list consists of about 600 music critics submitting their ballots.

And would you REALLY want the Chief's RT trying to differentiate between the 83rd best player and the 87th best player in the league? lol

I don't doubt you--I've never heard of this one way or another--but it's a horrible way to get a top 100 list. A respondent or two who skips the usual top 20 suspects could make or break inclusion on the list for those bottom 20 spots. They probably don't get more than a couple dozen responses overall, and most of those will be highly multiplicative. That's crazy.

Who is "they"?

 

[Idgit]

If close to 500 players fill out the ballot, there will most definitely be enough variation. The Village Voice top 100 albums list consists of about 600 music critics submitting their ballots.

And would you REALLY want the Chief's RT trying to differentiate between the 83rd best player and the 87th best player in the league? lol


Who is "they"?

It's still not measuring what it purports to measure. You're getting 500 top 20 lists, and the statistical spillover.

I don't necessarily want anyone doing a list of the top 100 players. That was my point to begin with. But, if that's what you're attempting, then, yes, I'd expect them to ask for the top 100 from the people they ask to cast their votes. Wouldn't you?

 

[DFWJC]

I can't find anything to back this up, but I heard on a radio show that it was a total of about 35 players TOTAL. If true, that's significantly less than 28.3%

Closer to 2%

 

[Califan007]

It's still not measuring what it purports to measure. You're getting 500 top 20 lists, and the statistical spillover.

In my eyes, what the list purports to measure is which players came to mind the most when asked to name the best 20 players in the league. #80-#100 are all basically tied...who really cares if Player A is ranked 85th and Player B is ranked 81st?

I don't necessarily want anyone doing a list of the top 100 players. That was my point to begin with. But, if that's what you're attempting, then, yes, I'd expect them to ask for the top 100 from the people they ask to cast their votes. Wouldn't you?

HELL no lol...

It would practically guarantee useless data past the #40 or so player. And once you got down past #80, guys would just start filling in players to get the list done. By concentrating it on their top 20 players it at least gives each participant a fighting chance to give each player they list some serious thought. That goes out the window if you expand it to ranking their top 100 players.

There's a very valid reason most "top 100" lists are done this way. Anyway, it's not meant to be some statistically flawless measurement of player talent or anything lol...a lot of guys think highly of Dez Bryant and Ware (assuming he's in the top 20)...that's what the list tells me. A lot of guys think highly of Andrew Luck and RG3...that's what the list tells me. A lot of guys don't automatically think of Tony Romo when they're thinking of their top 20 players in the league....that's what it tells me. I think that's what it's supposed to tell me/us.

 

[Califan007]

Closer to 2%

Well, THAT'S been proven wrong lol

 

[Reverend Conehead]

I fail to see why anyone should care.

As I said elsewhere, these polls are as useless as a 3 dollar bill.

I have a friend who owns a chain of Taco Bell restaurants. Some years back one of his employees accepted a 3 dollar bill. Do you remember them? They were those joke bills with a photo of Bill Clinton.

I guess in this case the 3 dollar bill wasn't useless.

But I agree with you that these polls are stupid. I would say they're worth less than a 3 dollar bill since I know of a case where one at least got someone lunch.

 

[TwoDeep3]

What amazes me is the people who get their noses out of joint over any of these polls, or journalists opinions, or fans of other teams opinions about Dallas.

Now read this.

It doesn't matter.

Rinse and repeat.

You guys are swinging at a pitch in the dirt when you react to stoopid polls or opinions by people who don't mean crapola to a tree.

 

[DFWJC]

Well, THAT'S been proven wrong lol

How's that?

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

Romo's name is in the title of this thread. I wonder how long it will be before somebody gets this thread closed.

 

[Echo9]

Here ya go:




http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/05/05/inside-the-top-100-voting-process/




Some of Florio's arguments are laughable, but I'm gonna trust that he got the correct number, even if someone on a radio show claims it was only 30 players.

Works for me. Thanks for doing the digging.

 

[Echo9]

In my eyes, what the list purports to measure is which players came to mind the most when asked to name the best 20 players in the league. #80-#100 are all basically tied...who really cares if Player A is ranked 85th and Player B is ranked 81st?

Here's the problem I have with this. These 500 or so players are picking a top 20. Can anyone rationally explain a legitimate possibility that more of these 500 wrote in Dennis Pitta in a top 20 than Tony Romo?

I can't see it happening unless the data was intentionally skewed. Maybe all the Ravens got a vote. Maybe the NFL network took the top 20 from the players and just quietly filled in the remaining 80 on their own, knowing perfectly well that leaving a player like Romo off would generate enough buzz to make it through the off-season.

 

[Doomsay]

Simple. Coffee is for closers.

 

[Califan007]

Here's the problem I have with this. These 500 or so players are picking a top 20. Can anyone rationally explain a legitimate possibility that more of these 500 wrote in Dennis Pitta in a top 20 than Tony Romo?

I can't see it happening unless the data was intentionally skewed. Maybe all the Ravens got a vote. Maybe the NFL network took the top 20 from the players and just quietly filled in the remaining 80 on their own, knowing perfectly well that leaving a player like Romo off would generate enough buzz to make it through the off-season.

One explanation might be that Romo was ranked #91 in last year's list. So he barely made the list to begin with. Dropping 10 spots would move him completely off the list. If the majority of the voters filled out their ballots after seeing Romo in the last game against the Skins, it could have realistically made more than a few of them decide not to put him on their list. Pitta, on the otherhand, was last seen playing in the Super Bowl, where he had 4 catches and a TD. The voting took place between November and April.

Now, if the poll question was simply "Who is the better player, Romo or Pitta", the results would be different. But this list doesn't purport to compare one individual player to another. Like I said earlier, it's really only meant to show which players come to mind first when guys are asked to name their top 20 players in the NFL.