<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Positive Air Yards per Attempt: 2017 Update	</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.footballperspective.com/positive-air-yards-per-attempt-2017-update/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.footballperspective.com/positive-air-yards-per-attempt-2017-update/</link>
	<description>NFL History and Stats</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 May 2017 02:17:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Bryan Frye		</title>
		<link>http://www.footballperspective.com/positive-air-yards-per-attempt-2017-update/#comment-326052</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bryan Frye]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 May 2017 02:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.footballperspective.com/?p=33102#comment-326052</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.footballperspective.com/positive-air-yards-per-attempt-2017-update/#comment-326043&quot;&gt;Adam&lt;/a&gt;.

Whatever it is, it should be consistently applied. I use 100 with 15 equaling one standard deviation because that&#039;s what PFR uses. I figure if someone is reading a niche site like ours, he or she probably is already familiar with index scores. 

Alternatively, someone used to looking at data might prefer a base of 50 with 10 equaling one SD. 

I like a manifold display of stats. Showing raw numbers, adjusted numbers, marginal stats, and index scores together gives a fuller picture, I think. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="http://www.footballperspective.com/positive-air-yards-per-attempt-2017-update/#comment-326043">Adam</a>.</p>
<p>Whatever it is, it should be consistently applied. I use 100 with 15 equaling one standard deviation because that&#8217;s what PFR uses. I figure if someone is reading a niche site like ours, he or she probably is already familiar with index scores. </p>
<p>Alternatively, someone used to looking at data might prefer a base of 50 with 10 equaling one SD. </p>
<p>I like a manifold display of stats. Showing raw numbers, adjusted numbers, marginal stats, and index scores together gives a fuller picture, I think. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Adam		</title>
		<link>http://www.footballperspective.com/positive-air-yards-per-attempt-2017-update/#comment-326044</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Adam]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 May 2017 20:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.footballperspective.com/?p=33102#comment-326044</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.footballperspective.com/positive-air-yards-per-attempt-2017-update/#comment-326036&quot;&gt;Richie&lt;/a&gt;.

I just boils down to personal preference. I don&#039;t think there&#039;s a &quot;best&quot; way to do it. I favor the school grade scale over the IQ scale simply because I&#039;ve spent a lot more time dealing with grades than IQ scores. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="http://www.footballperspective.com/positive-air-yards-per-attempt-2017-update/#comment-326036">Richie</a>.</p>
<p>I just boils down to personal preference. I don&#8217;t think there&#8217;s a &#8220;best&#8221; way to do it. I favor the school grade scale over the IQ scale simply because I&#8217;ve spent a lot more time dealing with grades than IQ scores. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
