Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Who Said, "They Haven't Played Anyone..."


Anybodyhome

Recommended Posts

So, I actually set my DVR and recorded all the Monday "hindsight" NFL shows and zipped through them...

Tony Kornheiser: "... but who have they played? Nobody. They beat a Seattle team that was bad at 2-4 and a Green Bay team that isn't close to what it was a year ago..."

Adam Schein: "...they have a very weak schedule..."

Trent Green: "... Arizona Cardinals are the best team in the NFC..."

And the list goes on and on. The entire fallacy of the strength of schedule argument is at an all-time high when any complete NFL idiot knows the entire schedule is set years in advance and only 2 games are set based upon the previous season's standings. The notion of schedule strength, who a team plays and who they beat is a total and complete non-factor as the team has no control over who they play. This isn't college football or basketball where one can set up a few pansy-ass, easy-win games every year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just a talking point for the ignorant.  It's not going to stop.  As of a week ago or so, there was a graphic that compared wins vs current playoff teams and we were at the top.  After this week we might not be at the top, but we can't be far from it after just one game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(The following were calculated prior to the result of last nights NYG/MIA game)

 

The combined strength of schedule of opponents already played for the double-digit win teams goes like this: 

New England - 48.5% 
Denver - 47.9% 
Cincinnati - 46.7% 
Carolina - 44.4% 
Arizona - 43.2% 

Number of teams with winning records played: 

Denver - 5 
Cincinnati - 5 
Arizona - 4 
New England - 3 
Carolina - 2 

Number of losses to teams with LOSING records 

Carolina - 0 
New England - 1 (to 6-7 Philadelphia, who Carolina beat 27-16) 
Cincinnati - 1 (to 6-7 Houston, who Carolina beat 24-17) 
Arizona - 1 (to 5-8 St. Louis) 
Denver - 2 (to 6-7 Indianapolis, who Carolina beat 29-26, and to 6-7 Oakland) 

 

And yet Arizona doesn't get any questions about their schedule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was reading an article on Flipboard last night, so don't recall the exact source, but I think it was from one of the major outlets like ESPN or NFL.com.  Anyway, it made mention that Carolina had gone 13-0 this season while AVOIDING any strong teams.  Made my jaw drop at the incredible stupidity of the statement.  

As others have said, this ain't college ball.  We play who they tell us to play.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hell?     Cardinals beat the Vikings........ a team with Teddy Bridgewater (guy had like 10 total TDs in 12 games) at qb and an injury depleted defense..            The Cardinals also beat that same "bad" Seahawks team...and a Bengals team that ALWAYS chokes during primetime games.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Newtcase said:

Seattle got to play Jimmy Clausen...TWICE

That's what blows my mind.     Jimmy Clausen  ,  I like the guy and wish him the best,  but he is a poor man's Curtis Painter.    Essentially the Seahawks shut down Clausen twice.............and it's all "Omg the LOB IS BACK!!!!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • You’re playing madden we’re talking real football stuff…. He does have you seen his special on internet he def thinks he’s getting paid 
    • Without the team having an identity kinda hard to predict what they value.  They either are really trying to build a balanced team, or preparing for another swing at qb if Bryce doesn’t pan out. Seems like we value the o line but the $ spent there has been underwhelming besides Lewis, you could say it’s because of injuries but still hasn’t been worth the investment. as already stated, the whole handling of Bryce young as a whole has been ass backwards, we spent the years we’re supposed to take advantage of having a qb with a lower cap hit, building the team up to be adequate. now It appears, key word appears, the saints have done it correctly, which is painful to even think about. Regardless, I hope the front office has paid attention to qb contracts recently, such as Tua, Kyler, Daniel jones(pre colts) and don’t settle for subpar qb play at franchise qb rates    
    • This is the flaw in your logic.  Cutting 3 of our best players will somehow move us from whatever we are to "compete". Even the most Young super fans are not predicting a ceiling above top 10-12, and that will not nearly cut it.  Someone will need to break the log jam of QBs getting nothing or North of 50. Our qb is at best a middle ground, lets hope it will be us that also manage to pay the worth at about 100 over 3 years.  And before you jump me, yes that is only of he improves.
×
×
  • Create New...