In July, I wrote a piece titled “The Rate of Domestic Violence Arrests Among NFL Players,” which has been getting a lot of attention recently — some of it missing the point.I based the analysis in my article on USA Today’s NFL Arrests Database, combined with data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ Arrest Data Analysis Tool and some historical data gleaned from the National Incident-Based Reporting System and a variety of BJS reports on domestic violence. The main points I made were:For most crimes, NFL players have extremely low arrest rates relative to national averages.Their relative arrest rate for domestic violence is much higher than for other crimes.Although the arrest rate for domestic violence may appear low relative to the national average for 25- to 29-year-old men, it is probably high relative to NFL players’ income level (more than $75,000 per year) and poverty rate (0 percent).But the article has been cited by a number of people to support the proposition that the NFL does not have an unusually high domestic violence rate. While I think this is a fair characterization of my intermediate results — the arrest rate I noted was 55.4 percent of the national average for 25- to 29-year-old men as suggested by the USA Today arrest data and rough number of players in the NFL — it’s misleading when taken out of context.Let’s be more explicit about the different assumptions that can affect that bottom-line comparison. For that analysis, I generally tried to lean toward assumptions favorable to the NFL, with the intention of showing that, even under those assumptions, the NFL appeared to have a “downright extraordinary” arrest rate for domestic violence.But there are still a lot of unknowns in the data and lot of choices to be made about what exactly we’re comparing to what.Reliability of arrest dataA lot of readers, commenters, emailers, tweeters, media, etc., have questioned the USA Today NFL arrest data. They’re right to be skeptical. There’s a good chance the arrest data is incomplete — particularly when it comes to marginal players who are only attached to the NFL briefly.When I wrote that piece, I was concerned about both over- and under-inclusion: The pool of NFL players who would pop up in the database might be even larger than the estimate based on roster limits (because some players come and go, and players are frequently dropped and replaced throughout the year), but it might also miss some players whose arrests flew under the radar.I hand-sampled a number of cases and found that they appeared to include many marginal players with minimal attachment to the league. With the NFL being so intensely followed, I thought the USA Today data set was probably pretty comprehensive.But some readers have made some good cases for why the arrest count the database produces could be low.On the pure data-collection level, I’ve corresponded with an enterprising reader who compared the frequency of arrests in the USA Today data for players with more games played vs. those with few games played. He found the first group had a much higher arrest rate. From this, he concluded that the database was probably missing arrests for lesser-known players, and he determined that basing the arrest rate on an assumption of 53 players per team (rather than the 80 players per team I used) was the most accurate approach (only coincidentally corresponding to the number of players on the roster during the year).His case seemed strong to me but not conclusive: It’s possible that marginally attached players are arrested at a lower rate. For example, marginally attached players may be younger (unsigned rookies) or older (borderline veterans) than typical players, and thus less likely to have families (younger) or be aged out of the most likely group to commit domestic violence (older). Additionally, we don’t know what’s driving the NFL’s overall domestic violence arrest rate, and I can imagine plausible scenarios in which regular players are more likely to commit and/or get arrested for the offense.Another potential problem, as several readers pointed out, is that virtually any NFL arrest data may understate the equivalent arrest rate in a less privileged population. In other words, NFL players who are involved in domestic violence incidents could be better at avoiding arrests than the general public. Relatedly, it’s possible there have been arrests that were either avoided or kept off the media’s radar because of team and/or league machinations.Whether any of those possibilities are likely or not, we should be explicit as to how our position on them affects our results.An appropriate pool for comparisonIf we want a bottom-line NFL vs. X number, the pool you use for X is obviously quite meaningful. But it’s difficult to figure out which pool we should be comparing to, and even if we do know what pool we want to use, figuring out their arrest rate (especially for domestic violence crimes) can be quite difficult.In my article, I primarily compare NFL arrest rates to arrest rates for 25- to 29-year-old men, and then I compared their arrest rate for domestic violence to their arrest rates for other crimes (it’s about four times higher). While we don’t have arrest data broken down by income, we do have such breakdowns for victimization rates (based on BJS survey data). I compared the relative domestic violence victimization rate for people from households making $75,000 or more to both the overall domestic violence victimization rate (it’s 39 percent as high) and rate for ages 20 to 34 (20 percent as high). It’s impossible to compare this directly to the relative NFL arrest rates with precision, but at least it gives us some benchmark for how income level may affect domestic violence incidents.In addition to inherent murkiness of trying to compare across different types of data, there are a few other possible problems with the $75,000 or more per year comparison.First, NFL players have a number of advantages that your typical member of a household making $75,000 and up each year may not. That’s the highest income group I had data for, but NFL players are typically wealthier than that. NFL players spend a good portion of the year in an extremely structured environment. They have extremely low rates of drug and alcohol abuse (especially relative to arrest rates for drug and alcohol-related crimes), and alcohol and drugs tend to be big risk factors for domestic violence.On the other hand, NFL players didn’t necessarily have the advantages that a lot of $75,000-and-up earners do. NFL players may be more likely than those earners to have come from difficult backgrounds, or to have experienced or observed abuse in their families, and in general to have missed out on the privileges associated with coming from a wealthier background.Finally, there are some differences in the data that we don’t know enough about to say what their effect might be, such as:Are victims from higher-income households more or less likely to make police reports that lead to arrests?How does the extreme wealth disparity between NFL players and their domestic partners affect the power dynamics that may lead to more or fewer arrests?Note: None of this has to be the case, and I haven’t studied these factors or their effects on criminality. But they are questions that affect our assumptions, and affect what type of comparison we should be making and how we should interpret it.Even if we could settle on a perfectly representative pool for comparison, getting even approximate figures for each group is extremely difficult. For example, as I noted in the original article, the BJS’s Intimate Partner Violence reports don’t include breakdowns by income anymore. So we have to make reasonable estimates based on several related numbers. This process has a lot of wiggle room in it as well, so we should be clear to look at what kinds of proxies lead to what kinds of results.Different combinations of assumptionsWith so much murkiness in both our data and our aims, the best thing to do is to look at a range of assumptions and see whether there are patterns that are apparent independent of such choices.Let’s first combine the possible issues with the USA Today data and represent them as a single number — which we’ll call “percentage of arrests captured by USA Today data” — representing its completeness with regards to actual arrests, as well as arrests that were otherwise avoided.Likewise, let’s combine the issues about comparison groups into a single percentage representing the bottom-line arrest rate of our comparable population (whatever it might be) relative to our 25- to 29-year-old average. In other words, we’re using one metric to represent each group by our best estimate for its relative arrest rate (which we can compare to benchmarks).Then we combine these two metrics with the information we have (NFL Arrest Rates in USA Today database, approximate number of NFL players and arrest rates for the general population), like so:We calculate the known NFL arrest rate and scale it to per 100,000 by taking the NFL arrests per year in the database, multiplied by 100,000, and divided by the number of NFL players per year (approximately 2,560).We divide this by the “percentage of arrests captured by USA Today data” (by assumption, per above).We gather data on the known national arrest rate for 25- to 29- year-olds, which is per 100,000.We divide this by our estimated relative arrest rate of a comparable population (by assumption, per above).Finally, we calculate the ratio between 2) and 4) and subtract 100 percent — this tells us how our estimated NFL arrest rate compares to the rate we estimate for a comparable population.Now we can chart the result of this calculation for given values of A and B as heat maps. Even if we assume extremely incomplete arrest data, the NFL’s overall arrest rate is still very low relative to the national average for its age range. But if we hold the NFL to an extremely high standard, we can still find its arrest rate to be subpar.I’ve used the same color scheme for both of these (100 percent = white). So it should be obvious that the NFL’s doing much worse with domestic violence arrests than with arrests overall.Note that the difference between assumptions can be an order of magnitude or more. Under a favorable set of assumptions, the NFL looks better than average; under an unfavorable set of assumptions, it’s doing terribly.For example, if you compare NFL players only to the national average for 25- to 29-year-old men, and you assume that the USA Today database is pretty much complete, you arrive at the 55.4 percent figure.On the other hand, if you assume that the NFL’s domestic violence arrest rate should be proportional to the overall arrest rate, you can see that the NFL has a “domestic violence problem,” whether the USA Today data is complete or not. This was essentially the scenario I was leading to in my initial article.
Excludes plays that are obvious passing or rushing situations: when a team is down by at least two scores, is in a short-yardage situation, is at the goal line or is showing three or more WRs; or when the game is in the final six minutes.Source: ESPN Stats & Information Group Tennessee3.931.0239 Indianapolis3.620.02727 Cleveland4.123.21022 New Orleans5.121.5%125 San Francisco4.127.31316 LA Rams4.522.6324 Atlanta4.217.3732 New England4.427.7515 Carolina3.642.0282 Denver4.021.21826 Arizona3.444.0301 NY Giants4.033.9168 TeamYards/Rush8+ Box RateYards/Rush8+ Box Oakland4.137.5113 Philadelphia4.534.547 Detroit3.318.03131 Chicago4.119.51429 Washington3.627.92614 Minnesota4.028.31912 NY Jets4.030.52010 Kansas City4.722.9223 Dallas4.336.665 Pittsburgh4.037.2174 LA Chargers3.924.12221 RANK Teams don’t crowd the line to stop New OrleansNFL teams by rushing yards from running backs in 2017, with how often each offense faced at least eight defenders in the box Cincinnati3.719.62528 Tampa Bay3.525.22918 Jacksonville4.236.296 Buffalo4.028.92111 Seattle3.318.23230 Miami4.128.01513 Baltimore4.227.0817 Green Bay4.124.61220 Houston3.824.82419 After more than a decade of tearing teams to shreds through the air, the New Orleans Saints made a stunning change this season to their offense: They grounded their arsenal. The 2017 Saints are the most dominant rushing team in football, comfortably leading the league in yards gained by running backs. So the obvious solution for the Carolina Panthers in Sunday’s wild-card game is to stack the box with too many defenders for the Saints offensive line to block.But this won’t happen. And here’s what makes the New Orleans offense something that previously existed only in a defensive coordinator’s night terror: Drew Brees is still one of the NFL’s most effective passers, even when he’s leading the game’s best rushing attack. To put it another way, the Saints are winning because of their running game, and the Saints running game is winning because of Brees.Despite racking up more than 2,000 rushing yards by mostly Mark Ingram (1,124) and Alvin Kamara (728), the running backs and the team’s offensive line rarely had to account for eight or more defenders near the line of scrimmage. Saints’ opponents have been unwilling to commit to stopping the run — which is what you generally do against great running teams. To measure this fairly across the league, we first need to get rid of all the obvious pass or run scenarios based on down and distance or game situation.1We threw out any play where there were more than two wide receivers in the formation or an offense was down two or more scores because this suggests to a defense that a pass is coming. We also dumped all short-yardage plays (1 yard from a first down) and goal-line situations (3 or fewer yards from the end zone). Lastly, we ignored the final six minutes of the game because an offense’s intentions here are frequently obvious — whether it’s to play catch-up (pass) or to kill clock (run). Looking at what’s left, the Saints faced stacked fronts of eight or more defenders on just 37 of their 172 rushing plays, according to ESPN’s Stats & Information Group — a rate of 21.5 percent that’s 25th in the league. The average for all NFL teams is 28 percent. The Saints weren’t the only team that seemed to be preventing defenses from loading the box, but they had by far the most running success. Like the Saints, the Chiefs and Falcons ranked in the top five in yards per pass, which was enough to keep defenses from committing to stopping the run. While the Rams appear to fit this profile too, they played so many three-plus WR sets that teams simply could not commit that many defenders to the line of scrimmage.Playing against conventional fronts even when employing run-friendly personnel (no more than two WRs) is the key to the Saints’ success in generating yards before contact. Their running backs led the NFL in 2.85 yards on average before encountering a defender. Yes, a lot of this is good vision by the backs and effective offensive line blocking. But the fact that there weren’t often too many defenders at the line of scrimmage was Kamara and Ingram’s secret weapon.On paper, Brees’s role in the offense seems more minimized than ever: 23 touchdown passes after nine straight years of 30 or more, just 536 pass attempts after averaging 656 the prior seven seasons, and a Saints career low of 4,334 yards. But this isn’t 2015 Peyton Manning clearly wheezing to the finish line and needing the team to dominate in other areas in order to win. Brees, 38, led the NFL this year in yards per pass attempt, and his 103.9 passer rating was his best since 2013.Look no further than the Saints’ opponent on Sunday for an example of a team that has to deal with stacked fronts because defenses don’t fear the passing game. Carolina running backs had to face at least eight defenders in the box on 42 percent of the rushing plays in our sample, the second-highest rate in the league. And why not? Cam Newton ranks 21st in passing yards per attempt and 24th in passer rating, and he’s more a threat when he’s running himself.But even Ben Roethlisberger’s Steelers (37.2 percent) and Tom Brady’s Patriots (27.7 percent) were forced to send running backs into defenses with extra run-stoppers at the line of scrimmage far more often than the Saints. Maybe defenses have been slow to adjust to the Saints’ new offensive model, but Brees’s presence helping the running game find room is no recent phenomenon. Since 2010, the Saints’ average of 4.5 yards per rush by their running backs is the third-best rate in football.The even worse news for Carolina on Sunday is that perhaps no team has been more flustered by the multidimensional Saints than these Panthers. In their two prior meetings, both Saints wins, Carolina allowed 149 and 148 rushing yards. Those are the two worst performances by the Panthers’ run defense all year. And it’s not like they’re stopping Brees either: The future Hall of Famer posted a 117.8 passer rating with four TD passes in those two contests. The Panthers seem to have been caught in between the new Saints and the old-model Saints — and able to stop neither.Check out our latest NFL predictions.
In what might stand as one the biggest games of the year, the No. 20 Ohio State women’s volleyball team came out swinging in front of its home crowd Wednesday evening at St. John arena against the No. 1 team in the country, Penn State. It wasn’t good enough to topple the Nittany Lions, though, as the Buckeyes fell to their conference rival, 3-0. While the game went back and forth, PSU’s play in the contest’s most critical moments dropped the Buckeyes to 14-7 overall record. Early in the second set of the game, the Nittany Lions roared out to a commanding 7-0 lead. Ensuing pressure forced coach OSU Geoff Carlston to call a timeout. “After that timeout, we just brought it in on the court and decided that we know what we need to do,” said senior setter Amanda Peterson. “It’s us on the court, we know exactly what to do; let’s just do it. We made a collective decision that we’re not going to go down like this, we’re going to go down swinging.” With a new rekindled energy, the Buckeyes started their comeback with a 6-0 run and evaporated PSU’s lead to one. Although the Buckeyes stepped up as a team, senior outside hitter Emily Danks lauded one particular teammate. “Davionna (DiSalvatore), our libero, she played lights out,” Danks said. “She covered so many balls, dug so many balls up and when things looked hopeless, here she comes out of nowhere. She played awesome, and I’m so proud of her. I think everyone just had enough and stepped up at that point.” The Buckeyes eventually lost the second and third set 25-19 and 25-22, respectively. “I think the toughest thing about really close matches just all the time is that you were so close,” Peterson said. “It was just those couple of mistakes that you can think of that you’re like, ‘If I didn’t do this, we could’ve won.’ It’s those few couple of points that are just weighing on your brain. If you can fix those things, we could’ve won.” Inconsistency and making better defensive plays, specifically second reads and balls, were things Carlston said his team needs to get better at. The most frustrating thing to him, however, was the fact that his team hung tough with the top team in the country before falling in the end. “Well, I think we were right there,” Carlston said. “We talk about it a lot, practice it a lot and, you know, after the 18, 19, 20 points, that’s when … if you’re going to win, if you’re going to beat the No. 1 team in the country, that’s when you need to be at your best and we weren’t tonight, we made too many mistakes. Hats off to Penn State, they did what they do a lot, they played best at the end, and you know, it’s frustrating because I think we were right there.” Consistency, as in staying aggressive, is something Carlston has emphasized throughout the year, and once again he pointed out this is something his team needs to continue to get better at. “You can’t make so many mistakes, and we got to play aggressive all the time,” Carlston said. “We can’t play aggressive 80 percent of the time; we can’t play great at 80 percent of the time because that gets you losing by three or four points. You know, you got to put your foot on the gas and keep doing it … We just didn’t do it tonight at all.” Danks said she understands what separates mediocre teams from the good teams, and knows the things that her team needs to work on to become one of the elite teams. “We have the talent, we have the manpower, it’s just a matter about being mentally tough and being aggressive.” Even though the tough loss resonated with the players, Peterson stayed positive and reflected on what this game showed her about the team. “I think something that’s important for us to take away from this match is that they’re the No. 1 team in the nation right now, and we were right with them the whole time,” Peterson said. “That just tells us that we can hang with them. We can do some pretty cool things this year.” Regardless of the outcome, Danks said she was proud of her team. “A lot of teams, especially against such a talented team like Penn State, once you get to game three and you lost two, they kind of give up hope,” Danks said. “I was really proud of our team for coming out just totally believing, swinging away, making big plays and we were just right there.” The Buckeyes travel to East Lansing, Mich., to play against Michigan State on Saturday, and Danks said this loss did not put a damper on their confidence. “We’ve shown that we can hang with some very talented teams, so I think our confidence is up,” she said, “and it’s just a matter of making those plays at the end of the games and we will be fine.”
Napoli Coach Carlo Ancelotti has described it an honour to have worked with John Terry in his latest tribute to the former England player following his retirement.Carlo Ancelotti had a successful stint at Chelsea, winning the Premier League and FA Cup in the 2009-10 season before being sacked the following summer after a trophyless campaign.Last night his skipper for those occasions, who made over 700 appearances for the Blues, announced his retirement and Ancelotti paid tribute on his Instagram page.“An honour to have had you as captain,” the Napoli manager wrote.“Wishing you much success in your future endeavours.”John Terry has been tipped to nail a managerial role in the next few months to come in the bid to replicate his success story.And most Chelsea fans will be hoping he gets the chance to manage his beloved club.
KUSI Newsroom SAN DIEGO (KUSI) – A federal judge Wednesday denied Qualcomm’s request to halt sanctions stemming from the U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s antitrust lawsuit against the San Diego-based cellular technology company.U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh sided with the FTC in May, finding that Qualcomm forced cellphone companies to accept excessive fees for the ability to use Qualcomm patents, and would threaten to withhold access to its chips if companies did not agree to its terms.Koh ordered Qualcomm to renegotiate license terms with its customers and refrain from any threats to withhold chips from future agreements, an order that Qualcomm requested be delayed pending its appeal of the case.A Qualcomm representative said the company will be seeking a stay of Koh’s decision from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.The FTC brought the case in 2017, in which it accused Qualcomm of operating as a monopoly that “engaged in exclusionary conduct that taxes its competitors’ baseband processor sales, reduces competitors’ ability and incentive to innovate, and raises prices paid by consumers for cell phones and tablets.”In another federal case brought against Qualcomm by Apple, the two companies reached a settlement in the form of a six-year licensing agreement as a trial was getting underway in San Diego federal court earlier this year.In that case, Apple accused Qualcomm of using its powerful position in the industry to charge cellphone makers exorbitant fees to license its patents. Qualcomm, in turn, accused Apple of breaching its licensing agreements to use Qualcomm’s intellectual property by refusing to pay billions in fairly charged royalties. KUSI Newsroom, Posted: July 3, 2019 Federal judge denies Qualcomm request to stay antitrust case ruling July 3, 2019 Categories: Local San Diego News FacebookTwitter
To receive emergency alerts from the city, text your zip code to 888-777 to be enrolled in SMS messaging alerts. You can also go to www.Nixle.comto sign up for email alerts and create a free resident account. The Alaska State Troopers: “I highly encourage all Kenai Peninsula City residents to sign up for Nixle notifications so that we can keep you informed in the event of an emergency or important advisory. Nixle notifications have saved lives in other communities, but we can only reach you if you sign up.” Recently Nixle alerts have been utilized to alert residents of closures along the Sterling Highway due to the heavy smoke from the Swan Lake Fire. Facebook0TwitterEmailPrintFriendly分享Residents can sign up for Nixle to receive notices of emergency situations and other community advisories throughout the Kenai Peninsula. For more details you can contact the troopers at 262-4453.
Kolkata: The temperature in the city may go up in the next 48 hours, predicted the Regional Meteorological Centre at Alipore on Friday.According to the weather office, there is a possibility of scattered rainfall in the city and some South Bengal districts as well. North Bengal districts will continue to receive heavy to very heavy rainfall in the next two days, the weather office said.The temperature in the city and its adjoining areas has dipped for the past few days, due to rain caused by the arrival of monsoon current in the region. According to the prediction, there will be a marginal rise in the mercury in the next two days. Also Read – Speeding Jaguar crashes into Merc, 2 B’deshi bystanders killedThe temperature this season touched 40 degrees due to the advent of westerly winds, which were bringing a heat wave to the city. This occurred after the monsoon current got stalled for few days in the last week.The situation improved after the monsoon current got active and brought moderate to heavy rainfall in the South Bengal districts. This came as a relief to the city dwellers and also the people from the districts in South Bengal, from the scorching summer heat. Also Read – Naihati: 10 councillors return to TMC from BJPAccording to the weather office, the rise in temperature may also lead to uncomfortable weather, with the relative humidity going up.A senior official of the weather office said that North Bengal is expected to receive heavy to very heavy rainfall in the next few days as well, while in Kolkata and most parts of South Bengal, the mercury may soar high.However, there is a prediction of thunderstorm, accompanied with gusty wind and lightning, in the South Bengal districts.It may be mentioned here that various North Bengal districts have been receiving heavy rainfall for past few days, as a result of which an alert was also issued to the local administration to take adequate steps to check any untoward incident.