NFL 2023: No Swifties Allowed

[briantw]

On 11/15/2023 at 8:57 AM, Rhom said:

Watson out for the season.  To have surgery on a fractured bone in his throwing shoulder.

A spot just opened up in the AFC playoffs.

ETA:  That contract is going to wind up in the running for worst in sports history soon.

Hey, we're still 7-3.  How are the Bengals doing this season?

[DireWolfSpirit]

19 minutes ago, briantw said:

Hey, we're still 7-3.  How are the Bengals doing this season?

Yeah i didnt get that comment either.

Cleveland with that defense is still a playoff team that you look past at your own peril, QB play is not the reason they are 7-3.

[DireWolfSpirit]

Wilson just brought down a hammer on the Vikes late.

Eta: Minny with a minute to get a do or die FG.

Edited November 20, 2023 by DireWolfSpirit

[Tywin et al.]

Bah. Too many turnovers finally caught up to us and Idk what O'Connell was calling on the last drive.

[Mexal]

9 hours ago, briantw said:

Hey, we're still 7-3.  How are the Bengals doing this season?

Not good.

[DireWolfSpirit]

This week with some of that attrition setting in, kind of that reminder that the 17 game schedule is a marathon not a sprint.

Same as the NBA, its more about whose left standing come the post season.

[briantw]

1 hour ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

This week with some of that attrition setting in, kind of that reminder that the 17 game schedule is a marathon not a sprint.

Same as the NBA, its more about whose left standing come the post season.

You need a little bit of luck to win any title.  Same as it ever was, especially in the NFL where one loss means so much more than in the NBA.  The Cavs started out 3-5 and I couldn't have given less of a shit because there are 82 games and a slow start is meaningless.  I typically don't even start watching the NBA until around Christmas when fantasy football is winding down. 

If the Browns started 3-5, their season would basically be over.

Edited November 20, 2023 by briantw

[Rhom]

Ooof... Maybe keep Week 17.  Gonna be more flexin going on here than at a Hans and Frans tribute.

[Maithanet]

No comments on the SB rematch on MNF?  For shame!

It thought it was interesting how closely the game matched the super bowl, with the position of the two teams reversed.  In both matchups, one team looked like the better, more complete squad and opened up a 10 point lead at halftime.  Then in the second half they were not only unable to maintain that momentum, but were pretty thoroughly outplayed and lost their lead. 

Congrats to the Eagles for their win.  Odd that of the three Chiefs losses, two of them are directly attributable to their WRs dropping a bunch of passes (Lions week 1 being the other).  That is very unusual - catching passes is just a baseline for WR play in the NFL.  But Watson and Valdez-Scandling both look to have a real drop issue, and they won't be in the league long if that continues. 

[Tywin et al.]

I cannot believe this stat. The Chiefs have scored the second most first half points in the league this year. They're last in second half points and haven't scored a second half TD since before Halloween. That's jarring if correct. 

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I cannot believe this stat. The Chiefs have scored the second most first half points in the league this year. They're last in second half points and haven't scored a second half TD since before Halloween. That's jarring if correct. 

Maybe Andy Reid is preplanning the entire first half, then runs out of material in the second half because his wide receivers can't catch anything, lol. What's amazing is the Chiefs are somehow 7-3 with this jarring statistic. 

Edited November 21, 2023 by Lord of Raventree Hall

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

22 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

This week with some of that attrition setting in, kind of that reminder that the 17 game schedule is a marathon not a sprint.

Same as the NBA, its more about whose left standing come the post season.

I would argue....that's not really true. Aren't the vast majority of Super Bowl winners 1st or 2nd seeds? Actually, I looked it up, since 1975 (the year seeding started), 26 of the 49 super bowl winners were number 1 seeds, ie..being a number 1 seed...gives you a 53% chance of winning the superbowl. The 2nd seed has also won an additional 10 superbowls, so between the 1st or 2nd seed, that's 36 of 49, or in other words, 73% of the time. So, again, 1st or 2nd seeds win the superbowl 3/4s of the time. The wins matter in the regular season. A lot. 

By the way, the numbers are similar for the NBA, too...or maybe even more slanted toward the top seeds..let me check. Yes, the 1 seed has won 51 times (66% of the time), 16 for the 2 seed (21%), 8 for the 3 seed (10%), and together that is 75 out of the 77 championships, or 97% of the time. The regular season does matter a lot to who actually wins. 

I guess you could call it a battle of attrition, but often...the 1 seeds or high seeds, stay high seeds all season in both leagues. Of course it is not unheard of for teams to fall apart or go on hot streaks...but often even when that does happen, it's not enough. For example, last year the Lakers went on a huge hot streak. They then lost to a team that was hot all season (the Nuggets) in the playoffs. 

[aceluby]

2 hours ago, Maithanet said:

But Watson and Valdez-Scandling both look to have a real drop issue, and they won't be in the league long if that continues. 

Heard a stat last night that the Chiefs as a whole currently lead the league in dropped passes.

[Tywin et al.]

46 minutes ago, aceluby said:

Heard a stat last night that the Chiefs as a whole currently lead the league in dropped passes.

I believe they have the most overall drops and the most drops in key situations. 

[Tywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

Maybe Andy Reid is preplanning the entire first half, then runs out of material in the second half because his wide receivers can't catch anything, lol. What's amazing is the Chiefs are somehow 7-3 with this jarring statistic. 

I'm not putting the blame on Reid. They're just not a very talented unit on offense and Mahomes can't cover up all the front office failures at WR.

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'm not putting the blame on Reid. They're just not a very talented unit on offense and Mahomes can't cover up all the front office failures at WR.

oH, i'm not blaming Reid, so many possessions end on horrible dropped passes. Like, he called a play that worked. Then the receivers messed it up, lol. 

[Maithanet]

4 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

I would argue....that's not really true. Aren't the vast majority of Super Bowl winners 1st or 2nd seeds? Actually, I looked it up, since 1975 (the year seeding started), 26 of the 49 super bowl winners were number 1 seeds, ie..being a number 1 seed...gives you a 53% chance of winning the superbowl. The 2nd seed has also won an additional 10 superbowls, so between the 1st or 2nd seed, that's 36 of 49, or in other words, 73% of the time. So, again, 1st or 2nd seeds win the superbowl 3/4s of the time. The wins matter in the regular season. A lot. 

By the way, the numbers are similar for the NBA, too...or maybe even more slanted toward the top seeds..let me check. Yes, the 1 seed has won 51 times (66% of the time), 16 for the 2 seed (21%), 8 for the 3 seed (10%), and together that is 75 out of the 77 championships, or 97% of the time. The regular season does matter a lot to who actually wins. 

I guess you could call it a battle of attrition, but often...the 1 seeds or high seeds, stay high seeds all season in both leagues. Of course it is not unheard of for teams to fall apart or go on hot streaks...but often even when that does happen, it's not enough. For example, last year the Lakers went on a huge hot streak. They then lost to a team that was hot all season (the Nuggets) in the playoffs. 

But the question is not whether the best teams in the regular season are also usually the best teams in the postseason (they are).  It's whether the best teams in the early/midpoint of the season are also the best teams at the end.  The math you have provided doesn't answer that question at all, and thinking back just off the top of my head I feel like there are plenty of teams that start out 6-1 or 8-2 and look like worldbeaters only to fall off and fail to even win a playoff game.  Just last year the Vikings started 8-1, but stumbled a bit in the second half and lost in the wild card to a middling Giants squad.  The year before that Dallas started 6-1 (tied for best in the league), but finished as a 3 seed and lost their first playoff game. 

[Tywin et al.]

Last year's Vikings team was a statistical anomaly we'll rarely see again. They went 13-4 and 11-0 in one score games which was a record. They barely had a positive +/- for the season. Just looking at the current NBA standings the 11th place Clippers are +3.8 while the 5th place Kings are -.3. Sometimes a team's record makes no sense. 

[Wilbur]

Farewell, Matt Canada.

I like how all the sports commentators are NOW, now that he is fired, coming out of the woodwork to remark how easy it was to predict the play based on the formation Canada had the Steelers in at the snap.  Thanks, guys, really appreciate the useful insight.

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

5 hours ago, Maithanet said:

But the question is not whether the best teams in the regular season are also usually the best teams in the postseason (they are).  It's whether the best teams in the early/midpoint of the season are also the best teams at the end.  The math you have provided doesn't answer that question at all, and thinking back just off the top of my head I feel like there are plenty of teams that start out 6-1 or 8-2 and look like worldbeaters only to fall off and fail to even win a playoff game.  Just last year the Vikings started 8-1, but stumbled a bit in the second half and lost in the wild card to a middling Giants squad.  The year before that Dallas started 6-1 (tied for best in the league), but finished as a 3 seed and lost their first playoff game. 

Phili was 8-0 through midseason last year, and the Chiefs were 6-2 (they were also ranked 1 and 2 in the power rankings i looked at). No one else had 1 loss, i.e. they were tied for or the best record in the league (both midseason and end the year. In 2021, LAL was 7-2 and was ranked #4 in the power rankings (for the league). In 2020, the Chiefs were ranked number 1 an Tampa Bay number 6 in the power rankings. In 2019, SF was ranked 3 and KC 4 at midseason. 

I could keep going. My point is not : All NFL teams are completely decided by midseason, however...acting like the early part of the season is not important is silly. Most often the teams that go on to win teh championship were actually good the entire year (this is arguably even more true in the NBA than the NFL). Just to give you an idea in the NBA (I don't want to do this research anymore), I picked in the preseason to win the champtionship the Raptors in 2019 (who won), the Clippers in 2020 (they lost in the second round, but I was well aware the Lakers could beat them), the Bucks in 2021 (they won), the Warriors in 2022 (they won), and last season I picked the Nuggets (they won). Now, I am not doing this show off. I'm not a genius. A lot, A LOT of people picked the teams I picked in th epreseason, because those teams looked good. The Nuggets looked like the best team all last year, and then they continued to be the best team. In 2022, althought the Warriors were the third seed, it felt like they were ready for a big run all year. The Suns felt a bit fraudulent and the Grizzles felt not ready to go all the way yet all year. In 2021, a lot of people picked the Bucks (although Giannis had his haters) and the Bucks looked like a good team the entire year. In 2020, the Lakers and Clippers looked like the two best teams in the West all year (and we were robbed of the Battle of LA, ;( )

Like, what you are saying doesn't really line up the reality. I could pull specific articles, but the truth is...a lot of times the teams people think are going to win...win. From the beginning of the season. In both sports. Don't be surprised when KC, Baltimore, SF, or Phili are in the superbowl this year is what I'm saying. They look like the best teams now, and they very well look like the best teams in January.