“Arsenal fans say Wenger puts football philosophy ahead of trophies” plus 3 more |
- Arsenal fans say Wenger puts football philosophy ahead of trophies
- Fantasy Football Brothers RB Draft Philosophy
- Rangel gives defiant speech
- Obituary: W. Wallace Cayard / Navy vet taught religion, philosophy
| Arsenal fans say Wenger puts football philosophy ahead of trophies Posted: 10 Aug 2010 08:04 AM PDT Arsenal fans are questioning manager Arsene Wenger's 'footballing philosophy'. The Guardian says the Arsenal Supporters Trust, a shareholder group, has published the outcomes of its membership survey, the results of which were requested by the club while it conducted a strategic review of its activities. And 53% of respondents answered yes to the following question: "Do you think Wenger's football philosophy takes too much precedence over the objective of winning trophies?" Counteracting that were the 43% of respondents who answered no.
Need your Arsenal news fix? Click here for all Gunners news and transfer rumours. Five Filters featured article: "Peace Envoy" Blair Gets an Easy Ride in the Independent. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fantasy Football Brothers RB Draft Philosophy Posted: 09 Aug 2010 11:06 AM PDT  Jed Jacobsohn/Getty Images Welcome to Fantasy Football Brothers. This week we roll into week two of our Free Draft Kit. This week we are going to take a hard look at the RBs. Today we will have the philosophy, on Wednesday we will have our position ranks and write ups. Friday we will have our Preseason RB award ceremony. Also this week we are dropping our college draft kit for all of our college fantasy players. Every fantasy football league is set up differently with different lineups, rules, and different scoring. That means every fantasy draft is different. Most ranks that are out there are either geared towards a standard scoring league or a P.P.R. formatted league which means the draft cheat sheets that you are looking at are not customized for you or your league. It also could mean that you are using a cheat sheet from a magazine that was published and produced over three months ago. Which leads to a shameless plug. Be on the look out for our brand new drafting tool that we will release by the end of the week. Today we start with the state of the running back position, and we also dive into drafting philosophies. I told our readers last year that the drafting of back to back running backs is pretty much dead, and it still is. There are still people that live and die by drafting the back to back method. There are others that draft by the old RB-RB-WR-QB-WR philosophy, or some other variation of this formula.  Brandon Jacobs 835 Yards Rushing On His 224 Carries Equals A Lousy Yards Per Carry. A (3.7 y.p.c.) Is A Great Indicator Of A Poor Season Time Shares The first problem is the splitting of carries and with that comes the most hated phrase in fantasy football. Time share. Also known as the Running Back By Committee. I hate those words, because loosely translated in fantasy football language R.B.B.C. really means 16 weeks of potential anxiety and headaches. I went back through the last five years of stats for running backs and looked at how many backs had over 300 carries, how many more had over 250 carries and how many backs went over a thousand yards. The numbers do not lie. While the number of running backs that rush for over 1,000 yards in a season has pretty much remained steady over the last five years, the 250-300 carry barrier is on the decline.
 Frank Gore 229 Carries 1,120 Yards 4.9 Y.P.C. A High Y.P.C. Is Usually A Sign Of High Impact Numbers First lets address the obvious. In almost every type of league the top four picks are solidified for the most part. Chris Johnson, Adrian Peterson, Maurice Jones-Drew and Ray Rice are going to go in some sort of order 1-4. Yes in P.P.R. leagues, WR Andre Johnson could sneak into the top four picks and in touchdown heavy pass leagues that award six points per touchdown one of the top tier QBs could potentially go. But for most of us the real interesting stuff begins when you are drafting outside of the first four draft picks. That is where the value based drafting comes in. This isn't some revolutionary way of looking at numbers, this is simply looking at who gives you the most value at that particular pick regardless of position. By drafting the best available player you are allowing yourself the flexibility to build a squad that scores the most potential points period and you are not pigeon holding yourself by using some outdated archaic formula. After all the name of the game is to score the most points. Running backs are typically safer picks because they offer some consistency week in and week out because their usually steady scorers. While the WRs are typically more boom or bust each week. A few years ago when there were 10 RBs getting 300 plus carries a season, you would have a better idea who would be expected to get those carries and you knew the likely worst case scenario would be that your RB would get a minimum of a thousand yards and a few scores. As the number of Running backs that receive 250-300 plus carries continues to decline there is that much less room for potential backs to reach easy numbers. Teams are still running the ball, some are running more, the thing is most teams are just splitting carries and with each team it differs. There is the hot hand, the matchup play, the goal line back, the change of pace back, the power back, the between the 20′s back, the closer, short yardage specialist, passing down back and the 3rd down back. That is a ton of job titles to sort through. This year there are only 14ish elite WRs, but there are at least 30 backs that are capable of running for a thousand yards or more. But we know that only half that many will likely reach those numbers. I know if I'm drafting after the four spot, I try and cut out some risk and I go with WR Andre Johnson after that probably either QB Drew Brees or Aaron Rodgers. I love RB Frank Gore and Michael Turner this year but if I'm at five I probably pass on them. I like Steven Jackson too but I would probably pass on them because they all have holes in their game, namely all have significant injury histories. The other three guys I said I would take give me more value, because they are ranked at the top of their respective positions. There is better value these days drafting RBs in later rounds after the elite backs are gone. Now I'm not saying don't draft a RB for the sake of not drafting one. I'm saying open up your mind and realize all the potential players your team could have by not going back to back RB. I just want to point out a few situations that happened last year. Now this is not scare tactics by any means I won four out of the five leagues I played in last year. I had late picks in almost all of the drafts. But what I did was build a solid foundation around the players that were available to me in each draft. I never reach for a player just to fill some positional quota that has been forced upon us for the last 20 years. The NFL game has changed which means the fantasy game has changed and you have to be able to be flexible when drafting. Those that live in the past are destined to be left there. There is nothing wrong with drafting an elite QB and two elite WRs. Then going after your running backs in round four, is ok. On the other side of the coin last year Steven Jackson slid to me in two different drafts late in the first round. I liked SJack a lot but I thought there was no way he would slide that far to me. Then an elite WR went off the board and so did an elite QB, and because of that scenario, Jackson who should have gone somewhere 5-8 landed to me at 11 and 12. That is value that was too great to pass up, even with his injury history I had to take him. That is value based drafting. I'm not in love with RB Rashard Mendenhall but if he slid back down to me at the second round, because there is too much value at that spot. Now if you are picking at the end of the round that means you likely will have selected back to back RBs. That is ok, because it gives you the best value. Now if there was a player that you hate and they fall to you, go with your gut and stay away from him. If a positional run happens don't be part of the run unless it just works out that way for you. Paul wrote about this the other day, don't panic when a run happens. Good value is what you consider good value. If you educate yourself around what running back by committee's are fantasy worthy and what ones to stay away from you are already way ahead of the game. Identifying A Good RBBC and Staying Away From A Bad RBBC Carolina's backfield is outstanding and any owner would love to have either back. There are RBBC's that are more draft worthy than others. RBBC backs can be easier to gauge if they play on a team that has three things. A commitment to the run, a solid defense that allows the team to keep games close, and has at least an above average offensive line. Think Carolina, or Miami. RBBC's are bad for you when a team does not have defined roles, solid offensive lines, or the defense is porous and forces the team to abandon the run and start chucking. Think, Seattle, or potentially Chicago or Kansas City. New England (While N.E. meets some of the positive criteria, the constant injuries and uncertainty in the roles have made them a very poor RBBC Team ). Practice Makes Perfect Once you identify the players you like, mock draft as much as you can without getting yelled at divorced or separated. I tell people that email us this exact advice all the time. Mock it up what scenario do you like? Do you feel comfortable with an elite RB and an elite QB with a third tier WR? Do you like having two top tier WRs and and a borderline RB1? Try out different scenarios, see what players get drafted where, and watch how many talented RBs drop to you starting at the end of the second round, it happens almost everytime because other teams will be left scrambling to pick up the left over WRs and QBs because you and probably others are not drafting back to back RBs. Meanwhile load up on backs because you feel comfortable with the core you have, and now you just need to build around it. I love to build big RB depth because chances are at least one of the guys sitting on your bench will be great trade bait down the road. Every draft is different. Plan for that. Don't panic, when your guy goes right in front of you, because if you have run a few mock drafts, you have a great idea who else should be there. Did you know you can view our site on your mobile phone? Check it out. Five Filters featured article: "Peace Envoy" Blair Gets an Easy Ride in the Independent. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Posted: 10 Aug 2010 09:23 PM PDT In a defiant, dramatic and highly unusual speech, Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.) defended himself Tuesday against ethics charges by lashing out at the committee holding his trial, poking fun at President Obama, ridiculing conservative House Democrats and refusing to go away quietly. "I am not going away. I am here," Rangel, 80, said in a rambling speech from the well of the House, during which he dared his colleagues to expel him. A few lawmakers, including some members of the Congressional Black Caucus and fellow liberals, applauded, while most of his colleagues sat stone-faced. Midway through the 30-minute-plus speech -- which Rangel gave under the rarely used "point of personal privilege" rule allowing lawmakers to speak on any topic -- Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) went to the back of the chamber to huddle with aides. Democratic leaders were not given much notice of Rangel's intention to speak, and later Pelosi issued a statement suggesting that the issue should not spill onto the House floor: "As I have repeatedly stated, the independent, bipartisan ethics committee is the proper arena for ethics matters to be discussed." Democratic leaders had called the unusual one-day session to produce a pair of legislative victories, approving a $26 billion package of financial aid to states and a $600 million border security bill, after the Senate unexpectedly passed those measures last week. After a month of controversies, including the wrongful firing of an Agriculture Department official and ethics scandals, Democrats hoped Tuesday would be a pivot point for their rank-and-file members to tout in their districts throughout the summer recess. Instead, Rangel demanded the "right to be heard." His main point of contention was his pending trial on 13 counts that he broke congressional rules regarding his personal finances and fundraising efforts for a college center named in his honor. The ethics committee has not given a formal schedule for the trial, which is likely to begin when the House returns in mid-September. Rangel demanded that the committee hold the trial sooner, presumably this month, while the rest of Congress is on break. "Don't leave me swinging in the wind till November," he said. He noted that his primary election is Sept. 14, just as the House returns from its break, meaning his Harlem-based district will cast ballots not knowing the verdict of his trial. "I'm 80 years old. I don't want to die before the hearing." As he spoke without notes, often several feet from the microphone while gesturing to both sides of the aisle, Rangel created a sense of drama in the chamber that he might resign on the spot. He complained about how much it cost to "keep counsel," with legal tabs already reaching $2 million. "Each and every day, the expenses mount up," he said. He accused ethics committee Republicans of backing out of settlement talks and ridiculed the GOP in general for having no political ideas to run on in the midterms other than trying to associate endangered Democrats with his ethics problems. But Rangel reserved his most acrid comments for the roughly 10 Democrats from conservative-leaning districts who have called for his resignation -- and for Obama, who told CBS News in an interview that Rangel should end his 40-year career "with dignity." While most observers took that as a sign Obama thought the embattled lawmaker might resign, Rangel said he interpreted it much differently. "He didn't put a time limit on it," he said. Looking to his Democratic colleagues, Rangel reminded endangered Democrats how happy they were to bask in his fundraising glow while he was chairman of the powerful Ways and Means Committee: "I'm the guy that was raising money in Republican districts to get you here." As he spoke, Republicans placed recorded calls to voters represented by the more than 30 Democrats who have not returned contributions from Rangel's political committees. "Charlie Rangel might not have been found guilty of ethical misconduct yet, but there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he helped build the Democratic majority by padding the campaign war chests of dozens of members of Congress with millions of dollars in contributions," said Ken Spain, spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee. Rangel admitted to his colleagues that there were sloppy mistakes in filing his personal financial disclosure forms -- the basis of several counts against him, for not revealing more than $600,000 in income and assets -- and acknowledged that he should not have used congressional stationery for raising money for a wing at the City College of New York. But he said these were unintentional errors. "It may be stupid. It may be negligent. But it's not corrupt," he said, refusing any suggestion that he resign. The investigative subcommittee that conducted the probe has recommended that Rangel be reprimanded, a mild sanction that would require a full House vote, but Rangel suggested that he would never accept any rebuke: "If I can't get my dignity back here, then fire your best shot at getting rid of me through expulsion." Five Filters featured article: "Peace Envoy" Blair Gets an Easy Ride in the Independent. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Obituary: W. Wallace Cayard / Navy vet taught religion, philosophy Posted: 09 Aug 2010 09:47 PM PDT Obituary: W. Wallace Cayard / Navy vet taught religion, philosophy April 5, 1921 - Aug. 7, 2010 W. Wallace Cayard thought about becoming a Methodist minister but ultimately decided "that he had more questions than answers," his wife said. So instead of the pulpit, the college classroom became the venue though which the Navy veteran and father of four practiced his faith and pursued his scholarship, serving 30 years as a professor of philosophy and religion at what is now West Liberty University, near Wheeling, W.Va. Dr. Cayard, 89, died Saturday in Cranberry from the effects of Parkinson's disease. He was born in Port Arthur, Texas, in 1921. He was the first in his family to attend college, enrolling in Southwestern University in Georgetown, Texas, on the GI Bill, having served stateside in the Navy during World War II, his family said. His undergraduate degree was in philosophy and religion. He also received a master's degree in philosophy of religion from the Oberlin Graduate School of Theology in Oberlin, Ohio, as well as a doctoral degree in the same discipline from the University of Southern California in Los Angeles. In 1951, he met his wife of 58 years, Leonora Balla Cayard, during an interreligious peace workshop in Media, Pa. The couple wed in her native Germany the following year, and the Navy veteran became ill during the trip to that country by boat to participate in the ceremony. The episode years later remained a source of good-natured ribbing from family members. "A Navy man who gets seasick on a boat," quipped Cathy Habschmidt of Richmond, Ind., one of three daughters. In 1956, Dr. Cayard joined the faculty at West Liberty, a state campus formerly called West Liberty State College. He taught there until his retirement in 1986. He was a professor of philosophy and religion and served in that department as chairman, provost John McCullough said. The provost said Dr. Cayard also "was a strong and outspoken advocate on progressive social issues" and took part in the anti-war protest movement of the 1960s. His family said his strong convictions prompted him, as a professor, to found the faculty senate at West Liberty. Mrs. Cayard said her husband sought "to bring contemporary scholarship to Biblical studies." He enjoyed the challenge of upper division courses within the major but also enjoyed teaching introductory courses to nonmajors. "He said being around young people helped him continue to grow and learn and helped keep him young," Ms. Habschmidt said. Dr. Cayard was a member of the Religious Society of Friends, or Quakers, his family said. In addition to his wife and daughter, Dr. Cayard is survived by daughters Lisa Cayard of Morrow, Ohio, and Susan Cayard of Centerville, Ind.; a son, Steve Cayard of Wellington, Maine; six grandchildren and two great-grandchildren. He is also survived by sisters Barbara Cash of Nederland, Texas, Betty Lee of Groves, Texas; and brother Allie Cayard, of Little Rock, Ark. Arrangements are being handled by the Glenn-Kildoo Funeral Home in Cranberry. The family suggests that contributions be made to Pittsburgh Friends Meeting, 4836 Ellsworth Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15213, or to Sherwood Oaks Residents Association, 100 Norman Drive, Cranberry, PA 16066, for its employees scholarship fund. Bill Schackner: bschackner@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1977. First published on August 10, 2010 at 12:00 am Five Filters featured article: "Peace Envoy" Blair Gets an Easy Ride in the Independent. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Yahoo! News Search Results for Philosophy To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
No comments:
Post a Comment