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!

     

Only team with a winning record…


Diehardpanth02
 Share

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, UnluckyforSome said:

We are all a bit biased on that opinion as well, and that's what being a fan is about.

Actually that part abuot the Bears is not my opnion. I was watching some show and they were talking about how lucky the Bears have been this year. That's the only reason I brought it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, cranky said:

Actually that part abuot the Bears is not my opnion. I was watching some show and they were talking about how lucky the Bears have been this year. That's the only reason I brought it up.

That's fine and all, but I think you missed a little bit with what I was saying. It's not that your opinion doesn't matter or have merit, but I would think Bears fans feel exactly the same, that it shows they are growing and learning how to win, not just getting lucky bounces.

In that way, we are biased, even to the point that will seek out data that will support our feelings and judgement.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Pretty much... and another reason why I'm not a huge fan of stat driven stuff.

This is one of the worst scenarios statistically imaginable to pull out the "stats are for losers." This may go down as an all-time worst call. Let me show you.

 

Super Bowl Winners Point Differential

Over 100: 45 (76.3%)

50-100: 12 (20.3%)

0-49: 1 (1.7%)

Negative: 1 (1.7%)

 

Both the 0-49 and Negative instances were Eli Manning and the NY Giants.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, csx said:

This isnt some fantasy nerd stat. This is common sense scoring information. 

Yeah, I will wager the instances of teams making the playoffs with negative point differentials are quite small statistically. 

It just makes sense. If you are rarely outscoring other teams....well....that means you lose a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

This is one of the worst scenarios statistically imaginable to pull out the "stats are for losers." This may go down as an all-time worst call. Let me show you.

Super Bowl Winners Point Differential

Over 100: 45 (76.3%)

50-100: 12 (20.3%)

0-49: 1 (1.7%)

Negative: 1 (1.7%)

Both the 0-49 and Negative instances were Eli Manning and the NY Giants.

The only point totals that matter are the ones at the end of a game. 

In 2003, we started off hot but got manhandled in game five by the Titans. People said that 'exposed us', but it just turned out to be a bump in the road. Individual games can be different than the overall narrative. 

Of course, to be clear, my view of this season's overall narrative doesn't have us in the playoffs or ending as an upper echelon team.

Steps in the right direction perhaps, but we're still not that good... 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah, I will wager the instances of teams making the playoffs with negative point differentials are quite small statistically. 

It just makes sense. If you are rarely outscoring other teams....well....that means you lose a lot.

That's the part that matters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PleaseCutStewart said:

Our gameplan is pretty much hope that the other team fugs up more than we fug up. Somehow that strategy has resulted in a winning record (so far)

There is definitely a don’t fug up factor to winning in the NFL. In a true parity situation making the fewest mistakes is probably the number one factor in the outcome. 
 

I would add that in most jobs if you just handle the simple really easy to do poo like being on time and dressing properly, you are more than halfway secure. 

Edited by strato
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Gronk is the best TE of all time, but he also played with Brady. Clarke was great, but had Peyton and in an era TE's didn't make crazy money. Kittle is great, but the two times he's made the SB, he was still on his rookie contract for one, and the other the 49ers had Purdy on a cheap rookie deal which help them build the rest of the roster. So again, it's not about not wanting an elite TE, of course it would be nice.  But realistically, in today's NFL, unless that elite TE with a top end TE salary is on a team with a GOAT level QB and/or other serious cap savings (i.e. key players on rookie deals), then I think it's not a good use of cap space.  
    • This place was the poo pre tepper with tons of hilarious posters like phillyB. Joined in the 2000s during the 07 season and have been here bitching about this team since. but yeah its sadly been dying a slow death, every time I come to this site I am surprised its still up. I think the 2015 season was the absolute peak, the Panthers and this board especially just haven't "felt" the same since then. Igo should really sell the board since he clearly doesn't care anymore. Also, Reddit blows and the Bryce defenders on there need Jesus.
    • Guessing the price is too rich here given the injury history.  2024 was brutal and production dropped off in 2025 with a few more injuries (albeit rough qb play).    Don’t really understand the narrative that Young can’t benefit from talented upgrades on offense. Especially here with respect to a tight end. Any QB will benefit from talented receivers that threaten the top of coverage and tight ends with skills to stress zone.    The age and injury history, coupled with what he’s likely asking, just probably means we can better spend that money elsewhere.
×
×
  • Create New...