Daily Archives: February 9, 2007

Was Manning really the Super Bowl MVP?

Posted on by
Reply

Peyton_Manning.jpgI was glad that Colts QB Peyton Manning finally was on a Super Bowl winner because he is truly one of the NFL’s greatest QB’s of all-time. But I thought it was a tad absurd that Manning was named the Super Bowl’s Most Valuable Player when he didn’t even play particularly well. How about one of those fellows in the trenches where the Colts dominated the Bears throughout the game?
Dave Berri agrees, but makes the salient point that it is much more difficult to evaluate the performance of football players than the performance of players in other sports (i.e., baseball) that do not require the same degree of reliance on teammates as football. After pointing out that Manning actually was statistically worse during this season’s successful playoff run than he had been in each of the Colts’ playoff failures over the past three seasons, Berri observes the following:

So what lesson has Manning learned? For his team to win, he must play bad?
No, thatís not the lesson.
There are actually two lessons. First, playoffs are a small sample and luck plays a substantial role in determining the outcome (a point made last Sunday in The New York Times). Secondly, teammates matter in football. Quarterbacks do not win or lose games all by themselves. This was true when Manningís team failed in the playoffs. And itís true this year as well.
So we should stop judging quarterbacks strictly in terms of whether their teams happen to win. Manning was not less of a quarterback when his team failed to win its last game. And heís not finally a success because his team happened to win its last game.

Berri also makes an interesting point about Bears QB Rex Grossman. Read the entire piece.

Milton Friedman’s introduction to economics

Posted on by
Reply

milton-friedman-020807.jpgJames Hamilton passes along Stanford University Professor John Taylor’s touching tribute to Milton Friedman, which includes this anecdote about Friedman’s participation in an entry level economics class:

[Professor Friedman] was always willing to be a guest lecturer in my Economics 1 course, speaking to hundreds of Stanford students. He would start off telling the undergraduates that two major things the government is involved in are a mess — education and drugs — and that would set off a lively round of questions with his memorable answers impressing both those on the left and the right.

Along those same lines, Professor Friedman would agree with this cogent this Jacob Sullum/Reason op-ed that cogently explores the dubious nature of the government’s Prohibition on internet gambling and the recent governmental assault on a legitimate foreign business, Neteller PLC.

Trying to get in shape the hard way

Posted on by
Reply

WeightScale.jpgSandy Szwarc makes sense while expressing skepticism about the FDA’s decision to approve an over-the-counter version of Xenical (orlistat) for sale, the first prescription weight loss drug to be available without a prescription:

Even the FTCís scientific expert panel reviewing the evidence for weight loss advertisements, . . . determined that any claims that a weight loss product will cause weight loss by blocking the absorption of fat or calories were false and fraudulent advertising. . . . [E]ven with the prescription strength Xenical, people canít malabsorb enough fat a day to lose a pound a week and there are limits beyond which significant gastrointestinal problems occur. The panelís scientific analysis stated: ìThe biological facts do not support the possibility that sufficient malabsorption of fat or calories can occur to cause substantial weight loss.î

Meanwhile, this NY Times article reports that one of the formerly most popular ways to attempt to lose weight has fallen out of favor:

[I]f current trends continue, aerobics will be as rare as, . . . those vibrating belts that were supposed to jiggle away fatty hips and gravity boots that were supposed to ó what was it they were supposed to do? For now, the popularity of aerobics is sharply down from when it was ìthe mainstay of fitness in America,î said Mike May, a spokesman for the Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association.
Itís why you may have noticed ó if you have shown up at your gym attired in your best leg warmers with a sweatshirt off one shoulder ó the lack of aerobics classes on the menu. Fewer than half of the 300 gyms and health clubs recently surveyed by IDEA offered aerobics classes, a number that is ìcontinuing to decline,î according to the summation of the report.
At its peak in the mid-í80s, an estimated 17 million to 20 million did aerobics, Mr. May said. But only five million did in 2005, according to a report by the sporting goods association. ìWe expect the 2006 numbers to be significantly lower,î Mr. May said. ìAerobics are increasingly out of favor.î
The legacy of injuries is one reason. Many of the original instructors like Mr. Blahnik wonít teach aerobics ó because they canít. ìThose hardest hit by all those aerobics were often the teachers, because they were pushing harder than anyone else and doing the classes a dozen times a week,î Dr. Metzl said. ìOur bodies just werenít meant to withstand all that pounding.î

By the way, Art DeVany has compiled this category of blog posts that explores the damaging physical effects of distance running and endurance training. More exercise does not always equate with better health.