Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

printable version

Extra Points

Articles from around the Web



20 Nov 2009

Steve Bartkowski > Matt Ryan

FO design guy Benjy Rose pointed out this example of bad football analysis by NFL.com's Jason Feller. I'll let him explain.

In an article on road teams that could win this week, he mentions that since 1979, the road team has won every Giants-Falcons game (12 games, i think). Admittedly, that's odd. Then comes the good part: "So while Atlanta’s 1-4 record on the road this season would seem to be an ominous sign, the remarkable history between these teams outweighs anything that has happened in just 10 weeks of 2009." That's right, folks, how a team has played so far this season really has nothing to do with how they'll play in the next game. It's really up to Steve Bartkowski, Lynn Cain, and Jeff Hostetler.

Posted by: Aaron Schatz on 20 Nov 2009

24 comments, Last at 22 Nov 2009, 4:03pm by zlionsfan

Comments

1
by dryheat :: Fri, 11/20/2009 - 12:52pm

William Andrews runs for 150 this week. Book it.

2
by Benjy Rose :: Fri, 11/20/2009 - 1:02pm

Don't be so sure. I hear Jeff Van Note is listed as Questionable with sciatica.

11
by M :: Fri, 11/20/2009 - 5:32pm

But Phil Simms will lead a 4th quarter comeback even greater than "The Drive". Because no game ever is as important as a Giants/Falcons game.

3
by Big-Hairy-Andy :: Fri, 11/20/2009 - 1:29pm

The worst thing about it is that if Atlanta wins, the so-called analyst will feel vindicated despite his truly awful reasoning.

4
by ChrisH :: Fri, 11/20/2009 - 2:10pm

No one is worse with these meaningless stats than college football announcers. When they point out, for example, that "Team X is 18-0 lifetime against Team Y, with their last meeting coming in 2005", when none of the current players were on either team! If you want to point out that, say, USC has won their last 9 against Washington State (I'm just guessing here), then that's fine, since they play every year, but when you expect someone on a team to care that their team lost to another team, years ago, possibly before they were born, and the outcome might be affected by that result, then you are a moron.

5
by Anonymus (not verified) :: Fri, 11/20/2009 - 3:25pm

These stats might not be as meaningless in college football, where coaches have often been with the same team for 10+ years.

9
by DavidL :: Fri, 11/20/2009 - 4:25pm

That's true, but If, say, the Pats-Broncos games over the past 10 years had been swept by one team or the other, you'd talk about Shanahan owning Belichick or the other way around, not one uniform being dominant over the other.

21
by Neoplatonist Bolthead (not verified) :: Sun, 11/22/2009 - 10:26am

If the uniforms decided the games, the Chargers would win every SB!

What is it now, 13-1 in powder blue? Man, I love those pointless records. Also love those powder blues.

23
by Raiderjoe :: Sun, 11/22/2009 - 3:38pm

Is poster drunk? Cant be 13-1 cause Chargers wear powder blues vs broncos this seaosn and lose. Also wore powedr blues vs Ravebns in 2003 and chargers lose that one too. so right there that 2 losses. and maybe some others if do the resrarch.

7
by Bright Blue Shorts :: Fri, 11/20/2009 - 3:53pm

You don't think that psychology plays any factor in the outcome?

Using your (madeup) example ... if Washington State spend the week preparing with their coaches and the media saying "we haven't beaten USC in the last 9 years, this is the year we have to do it. We have to kick their arses and play hard". Then come the game, as soon as USC scores a TD or if it's close towards the end; the Washington State guys have to overcome all that talk that's primed them to lose even though they weren't there for all the other games ...

8
by DrewTS (not verified) :: Fri, 11/20/2009 - 4:07pm

That could matter, but only if the coach sucks so bad that he actually allows his players to think that what happened in 1987 (or even the previous year) has any bearing on the current game. It's also just as likely that the good team faces more psychological pressure, not to be the one that blows the 40-some year streak (I'm looking at you, Notre Dame).

24
by zlionsfan :: Sun, 11/22/2009 - 4:03pm

I think that at certain times, the history between the teams might play a role, but a good coach can use it in just about any fashion if he needs a motivating factor.

And I would guess it's much, much different in college than in the pros. I can't see Mike Smith in 2011 explaining to Matt Ryan that it's going to be an uphill battle against the Colts because the Falcons are 1-12 all-time against that franchise ...

6
by foolio (not verified) :: Fri, 11/20/2009 - 3:33pm

That's even worse football analysis than picking Chicago for the Superbowl.

10
by DrewTS (not verified) :: Fri, 11/20/2009 - 5:17pm

Surely, the author merely meant to spark a spirited discussion of determinism.

12
by Paul A (not verified) :: Fri, 11/20/2009 - 9:06pm

Hmmm...Navy had not beaten the Irish in a gazillion years, but once they broke the ice, now they do it all the time. CLEARLY, it's psychological.

13
by Big-Hairy-Andy :: Fri, 11/20/2009 - 9:27pm

Yep. Nothing at all to do with Charlie Weis. :)

14
by Rich Conley (not verified) :: Sat, 11/21/2009 - 1:18am

On a similar note, Felger had an article this week about how Deion Branch is better than Randy Moss, and the Patriots offense of 2001-2004 is better than now, because of the rings.

16
by The Ninjalectual :: Sat, 11/21/2009 - 6:23pm

hahahahhahahhahaha!!!!!

"Just look at that pumpkin."
-John Madden, looking at the moon.

15
by BigDerf :: Sat, 11/21/2009 - 2:24pm

Talking about recent matchups in the nfl is fairly pointless unless you are talking about divisional opponents 90% of the time.

The other 10% is for when teams constantly finish at the same place in their divisions and have to play each other (Pats vs Colts for example)

17
by Raiderjoe :: Sat, 11/21/2009 - 8:47pm

or liosn vs rams
or browns vs bills

18
by DrewTS (not verified) :: Sat, 11/21/2009 - 8:50pm

Zing!

19
by Anonymousssss (not verified) :: Sun, 11/22/2009 - 12:48am

or raiders vs bucs

22
by Neoplatonist Bolthead (not verified) :: Sun, 11/22/2009 - 10:30am

Ever notice that Lions is an anagram for losin'?

20
by Raiderjoe :: Sun, 11/22/2009 - 9:03am

Raiders abnd Bucsnot in same confernece. plus Ciefs worse team uin AFC West. Raiders moving on up and going to be perrenial afc west champ contenders in near future. maybe got a litle sidetracked this year but can still finish 7-9 8-8 ot 9-7. Season comes down to games vs Steelers and Cowobys becaause all other Raiders games winnable

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
To skip this, please log in.