Perhaps some of these are reasons for skepticism:
1) Although unable to assess your technical analysis in detail, we can see that it is at odds with the vast majority of media experts who are effusive in their praise of CDM. All over the airways again today.
2) As an administrator with little of computational software, I knew when I was getting bad advice when the analysis lacked nuance. In competitive, real life situations any course of action usually involves both pros and cons. It is most unusual, particularly for experienced operatives, to make choices that only involve negatives.
3) Even when the elements of your argument appears individually plausible, your overall scheme seems not to hang together. CDM is terrible at recruiting and worse at coaching, but he keeps winning and the program keeps improving.
4) Sometimes there appear to be logical errors. Example, CDM is mediocre because he only wins games that he has more talent in. (This is usually followed by a tendentious analysis in which all close calls favor your argument.) What percentage of mediocre coaches share CDM's winning record for games they should win?
5) Have you ever admitted to a major analytical mistake? Is it logical that even a superb analyst such as yourself never errs?
There is no doubt that you are our resident expert on football analysis and you are greatly appreciated. It is, however, unreasonable to expect uncritical acceptance of all your ideas. Please keep sharing your impressive knowledge, but accept the fact that it's human nature to be critical.
