Only team with a winning record…

[strato]

23 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

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... 

I remember in a Super Bowl season for them, New England took an opening week ass whipping from the Bills. You see this type of stuff quite often early in the season. 
An eventual playoff team losing to a bottom dweller that comes out strong, isn’t that rare. 

[L-TownCat]

10 hours ago, Diehardpanth02 said:

My questions are why do we think that is? 

When we win it’s usually close.

When we lose… it’s not close at all.

[kungfoodude]

4 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

That's the part that matters. 

You have spent a chunk of this thread arguing the opposite. I am perplexed by your tactics.

[Mr. Scot]

5 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

You have spent a chunk of this thread arguing the opposite. I am perplexed by your tactics.

Not at all.

I said the only thing that matters about how many points scored is who has more at the end of the game. If you're losing games, you're scoring less points.

The only time point differential matters is in some playoff scenarios. 

[SOJA]

after the last few seasons I don't really care. Being a competitive team on most weeks is good enough for me for now 

[mav1234]

43 minutes ago, SOJA said:

after the last few seasons I don't really care. Being a competitive team on most weeks is good enough for me for now 

It feels like it's been 5+ years since we have had meaningful games in November...

[kungfoodude]

5 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Not at all.

I said the only thing that matters about how many points scored is who has more at the end of the game. If you're losing games, you're scoring less points.

The only time point differential matters is in some playoff scenarios. 

I mean you literally are attempting to justify our -60 differential as unimportant in your first post in this thread.

Well, having a negative point differential(to the tune of -3.8/ppg) through 11 games is a very strong indicator of being a bad team. If anything, we have largely been overachieving stastically. 

The on field results also bear that out. So if we end up, and I think this is likely, as a 7-8 win team, with an even more substantially negative point differential at the end of this season how would this statistic not matter?

Point differential is the most basic statistic in existence that one can look at to largely guage the results. You do need to score more than your opponent to win.

[jasonluckydog]

Not many of us had this team winning 6 games this season. Im still in on going to the SB. We will probably play the Jaguars. We win it all. 

[kungfoodude]

56 minutes ago, jasonluckydog said:

Not many of us had this team winning 6 games this season. Im still in on going to the SB. We will probably play the Jaguars. We win it all. 

Eh, I was very consistent on my 4-7 wins prediction. Looks like the upper end of that is possible and maybe even beating those expectations. 

It's been better than I anticipated in a lot of ways this season. 

[strato]

I don’t remember what I said this year. I had us winning 6 last year. I was optimistic a little. 

I probably said 6 or 7. Wasn’t feeling optimistic so much this year. 

[Mr. Scot]

13 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

I mean you literally are attempting to justify our -60 differential as unimportant in your first post in this thread.

Well, having a negative point differential(to the tune of -3.8/ppg) through 11 games is a very strong indicator of being a bad team. If anything, we have largely been overachieving stastically. 

The on field results also bear that out. So if we end up, and I think this is likely, as a 7-8 win team, with an even more substantially negative point differential at the end of this season how would this statistic not matter?

Point differential is the most basic statistic in existence that one can look at to largely guage the results. You do need to score more than your opponent to win.

Not to me. You win six games by 3 points but lose one by 30, you have a negative point differential but still have a winning record.

Stats are flukey in football. That's why I don't rely on them for evaluation. 

Again, my evaluation of this team is not that they're a great team or even a very good team. What I've seen doesn't bear that out.

I see an average to potentially above average team that can beat bad teams and also has been able to hang with some good ones. Mind you, that's an improvement from previous seasons but it's still not where we want to be. 

And no, I'm still not convinced we get to where we want to be with Bryce at the helm. But we have some challenging games coming up where he at least has a chance to prove me and other doubters wrong.

Bottom Line: I doubt my overall assessment of the team is all that different from yours. We just arrive at our respective takes via differing paths.

Edited 36 minutes ago by Mr. Scot

[kungfoodude]

10 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Not to me. You win six games by 3 points but lose one by 30, you have a negative point differential but still have a winning record.

Stats are flukey in football. That's why I don't rely on them for evaluation. 

Again, my evaluation of this team is not that they're a great team or even a very good team. What I've seen doesn't bear that out.

I see an average to potentially above average team that can beat bad teams and also has been able to hang with some good ones. Mind you, that's an improvement from previous seasons but it's still not where we want to be. 

And no, I'm still not convinced we get to where we want to be with Bryce at the helm. But we have some challenging games coming up where he at least has a chance to prove me and other doubters wrong.

Bottom Line: I doubt my overall assessment of the team is all that different from yours. We just arrive at our respective takes via differing paths.

So you think that is a common scenario over the course of a season?

[Mr. Scot]

On 11/21/2025 at 3:20 PM, strato said:

I remember in a Super Bowl season for them, New England took an opening week ass whipping from the Bills. You see this type of stuff quite often early in the season. 
An eventual playoff team losing to a bottom dweller that comes out strong, isn’t that rare. 

Same season as us, I'm pretty sure.

They lost their opener 41-0 in what was a revenge game for a recently cut Lawyer Milloy. Everyone thought they were cooked. Didn't play out that way.

Stuff like that is why I don't put huge stock in stat driven analysis or poor early season / preseason performances. If you think back to week one, people had us contending for the number one pick this year after how we looked early on. 

[Mr. Scot]

15 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

So you think that is a common scenario over the course of a season?

I've seen it more than once, typically from slow starting teams that improve as the season progresses.

So far, that seems to fit Canales MO. It's why I think his offseason program needs some tinkering. 

Edited 8 minutes ago by Mr. Scot