Post-SB Hangover?

[ivanvamp]

I hear it mentioned a lot how the loser of the previous Super Bowl suffers from a "hangover" the next year and can't win it. I decided to do a little research to find out how true this was. I started in 1999, the year after Denver won back-to-back SBs. Here's what I found.

Take the SB winner and look at their previous season. It's very surprising what you find. I'm looking at 13 SB winners.

- 7 of them did not make the playoffs the previous season
- 3 of them lost in the WC round the previous season
- 1 of them lost in the Divisional round the previous season
- 1 of them lost in the Championship Game the previous season
- 0 lost in the SB the previous season
- 1 of them won the SB the previous season (2004 Pats, baby!)

Now, how many "opportunities" were there for teams in those slots? Well, each year there are 20 teams that don't make the playoffs, 4 teams that lose in the WC round, 4 that lose in the Divisional round, 2 that lose in the Championship Games, 1 that loses in the SB, and 1 that wins the SB. So 13 years' worth of that gives you:

- 260 teams that miss the playoffs
- 52 teams that lose in the WC round
- 52 teams that lose in the Div round
- 26 teams that lose in the CG
- 13 teams that lose in the SB
- 13 teams that win the SB

So here are the percentages, taking the first list and dividing it by the second list:

- Miss playoffs the previous year and win the SB: 7 of 260 = 2.69%
- Lose WC round the previous year and win the SB: 3 of 52 = 5.77%
- Lose Div round the previous year and win the SB: 1 of 52 = 1.92%
- Lose CG round the previous year and win the SB: 1 of 26 = 3.85%
- Lose SB the previous year and win the SB: 0 of 13 = 0.00%
- Win SB the previous year and win the SB: 1 of 13 = 7.69%

So the best "path" to winning the Super Bowl is to actually have won it the previous year. More teams that miss the playoffs the previous year go on to win the SB the next year than in any other category. But because there are so many teams that miss the playoffs in any given year, it's still a lower percentage play than other categories.

But the fact is that no team that lost the SB the previous year has gone on to win the SB the next year in this 13-year sample (and it goes back further than that too).

 

[jmt57]

You're looking at something that you have a one in 32 chance of happening (win your conference, lose the super bowl), followed by then an event that you have another one in 32 chance of happening (win your conference and win the super bowl).

If you look at a larger sample size going back to the first super bowl you find this has occurred twice: by Dallas in 1970-71, and by Miami in 1971-72. So statistically it has actually happened slightly more often (2 out of 45 times, or 4.444%) than the expected norm (1:32, or 3.125%).

 

[reflexblue]

I think you mean post 07 SB hangover, they still have one.

 

[The Gr8est]

The "hangover" that I DO think is in play in situations like this is from wear and tear on the players' bodies from extra games and a shorter break before TC.

The shorter off-season affects the coaching staff as well.


So reflexblue, OT but what is your avatar from? Is that from a movie that I haven't seen?

 

[ivanvamp]

The "hangover" that I DO think is in play in situations like this is from wear and tear on the players' bodies from extra games and a shorter break before TC.

The shorter off-season affects the coaching staff as well.


So reflexblue, OT but what is your avatar from? Is that from a movie that I haven't seen?

It's from Clockwork Orange.

 

[ivanvamp]

You're looking at something that you have a one in 32 chance of happening (win your conference, lose the super bowl), followed by then an event that you have another one in 32 chance of happening (win your conference and win the super bowl).

If you look at a larger sample size going back to the first super bowl you find this has occurred twice: by Dallas in 1970-71, and by Miami in 1971-72. So statistically it has actually happened slightly more often (2 out of 45 times, or 4.444%) than the expected norm (1:32, or 3.125%).

But I don't think it's a true 1 in 32 chance, because not all the teams are equal. It's not like rolling dice or finding one card in a deck. I mean, if I lined up against 31 NFL quarterbacks, and we had a contest to see who could throw the ball the furthest, would I have a 1 in 32 chance of winning? Obviously not.

Moreover, in years past, there were fewer teams in the NFL, so over the history of the NFL in the SB era, it can't be calculated at a 1 in 32 chance anyway.