Check out how the pros do it[url=http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/receiving/sort/receivingYards/year/2012/seasontype/2]http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/playe ... asontype/2[/url]
I had a good chuckle at this…
I really don't like how the statistics are displayed on the CFL website. The site is cumbersome and frustrating to use sometimes.
I especially don't like how they deleted all player stats prior to 2005? Why? Stats from 2000 to 2004 were available on CFL.ca, last year. Why were they deleted? To save hard drive space? Did they think no one would ever want to know player stats prior before 2005, which have already been compiled and were previously available on the site?
All CFL playoff and Grey Cup player stats, were also deleted in the last website "upgrade". I guess fans don't want to look at those stats either?
Another problem is many of the .pdf and .html team stats (which include game by game player stats) are incomplete, corrupted or the links do not work at all. This has been an ongoing problem for several years on the CFL website.
The sad fact is the CFL website at one time used to list historical player stats, but no longer. In the mid-90's I remember doing a comparison of CFL QB's who had passed for over 20,000 yds (Flutie #1, Kerrigan #31). All this information was readily available on the CFL website. I just wonder if the CFL was smart enough to save those historical player stats on a hard drive somewhere or were they lost forever in the shuffle? :roll:
When Ottawa comes back, the CFL should go back to the traditional East/West stats (with the option to seeing combined league-wide stats). Then there would be two leading receivers, two leading QB's, two leading RB's, one in the East and one from the West. This format served the CFL well for many years and added more interest for the fans (especially in the Big Four) than a list of players from all nine teams (with only be one Eastern QB in the top 5, for instance, but with a divisional list, all Eastern teams would have in QB in the top 5.)
A league can only be as good as the statistics they keep.
That's ESPN's site, not the NFL's. Here is the NFL's: [url]http://www.nfl.com/stats/topperformers[/url]. You can also get stats on each player, op[tionally filtered by position, but there's no sorting available. Worse than the CFL's stats site, IMO.
here is the NFL stats equivalent to the ESPN one I linked to[url=http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=0&statisticCategory=RECEIVING&conference=null&season=2012&seasonType=REG&d-447263-s=RECEIVING_YARDS&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-n=1]http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats? ... 447263-n=1[/url]
almost the same. Both have way more relevant info than cfl.ca
The reason I posted espn was because ever since the most recent upgrade of NFL.com, my older computer cannot handle it. It loads almost as slow as dial up. At least it seems that way. Other wise, it is still a way better site than cfl.ca
Thanks. I didn't open that tab. Agreed that it would be good if the CFL could tabulate and publish stats like this too. I wouldn't think that would cost the league that much extra.
Actually, another stat I'd like to see is completion rates for receivers. A couple of years ago, a number of Ticat fans were ragging on McDaniels for having too many drops. I ended up going through the CFL Live Play play-by-play for the season, counting the number of completions vs. incompletions for each of the team's top receivers. It turned out he caught pretty much the same percentage of passes thrown his way as Bruce or Mann; "Sticky", of course, earned his nickname with a much higher completion percentage. But if those stats had been available, people might not have been so hard on him. (Ok, they'd probably say the timing of his drops was worse. Whatever. Still a pretty good receiver in my books.)