CHFF: Mismatch of the Century [merged]

[xmarkd400x]

Article: http://coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_2117_Mismatch_of_the_Century.html

(Ed. Note: This isn’t pretty, Giants fans. But fret not. We follow it up tomorrow with New York’s Big-Blueprint for victory, with a 100-percent satisfaction-back guarantee that it will work if executed properly.)

By Kerry J. Byrne
Cold, Hard Football Facts mismatch-maker

We searched high and low. We labored over every guide book, stat compendium, game replay and online resource known to man and troll alike. We even probed our own Quality Stats in such deep, penetrating detail that we had to numb the pain with a Clemensian ****tail of lidocain, novocain and Elijah Craig.

We’ve still yet to find a legitimate reason beyond “act of the Gridiron Gods” why the Giants should beat the Patriots in Super Bowl XLII.

What we did find, folks, is the greatest statistical mismatch in NFL championship game history. Not Super Bowl history, folks. All of NFL history.

Super Bowl XLII is literally the NFL's Mismatch of the Century ... and the league is only 88 years old.

(But there is hope, Giants fans, in your own organization's storied history. More on the window of hope below.)

Good, entertaining read.

 

[oldskool138]

Re: CHFF: Mismatch of the Century

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=76118

 

[xmarkd400x]

Re: CHFF: Mismatch of the Century

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=76118

--- Fail

 

[NYCPatsFan]

Re: CHFF: Mismatch of the Century

Thanks. Good read.

One stat that keeps me from getting too confident: "... the 8-5 Giants smoked the undefeated Bears that day, 30-13, in what remains the NFL's greatest upset."

Given how we upset the much favored Rams (who incidentally, as the most prolific offense during '01, barely managed to beat us by a slim margin in the regular season), and how past records are not necessarily good indicators of how the teams would perform on game day, I give more importance to the intangibles such as the coaches, the team's experience and the team's motivation.

Based on that, I think we have a good edge and will be delighted if we indeed blow away the Giants on Sunday.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

CHFF New York's Big-Blueprint for Victory

http://coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_2123_New_York's_Big-Blueprint_for_Victory.html

 

[Watson's IQ]

Re: CHFF New York's Big-Blueprint for Victory

http://coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_2123_New_York's_Big-Blueprint_for_Victory.html

As always, great read. My favorite thing is that they once again smack down the tired "establish the run" cliche. I'm so tired of hearing that, I love that they consistently crush the notion.

"Naturally, Pittsburgh fell victim to cliche-riddled "Steelers' football." It's the same brand of football that swells the chest of Pittsburgh football fans with pigskin pride, but that has cost the organizatioon one playoff game after another over the years.

The Steelers certainly established the run that day, cranking out 181 yards on 32 carries (5.7 YPA), much to the delight of fans of "Steelers' football." The Patriots rushed for 22 yards on 9 attempts (2.4 YPA).

The Steelers were crushed, 34-13"

 

[godef]

Re: CHFF: Mismatch of the Century

Somebody didn't do their math...

Super Bowl XLII just the fourth time that one contender had a five-game advantage over its opponent against Quality Teams. The Patriots dynasty is now responsible for three of those mismatches.

• The 1979 Steelers entered Super Bowl XIV with a 9-3 mark vs. Quality Teams. The Rams were 4-4.
• The 2003 Patriots entered Super Bowl XXXVIII with a 9-0 mark vs. Quality Teams. The Panters were 4-3.
• The 2004 Patriots entered Super Bowl XXXIX with a 9-1 mark vs. Quality Teams. The Eagles were 3-1.

None of the above items represent a 5-game advantage...

• 9-3 vs 4-4 is only a 3-game difference.
• 9-0 vs 4-3 is only 4 games.
• 9-1 vs 3-1 is only 3 games.

The way to compute this is to add teh difference between wins and losses and divide it by half, although you must be careful if the "lesser" record actually has fewer losses or more wins (offset by even more wins or losses respectively). This is not the cae here.

 

[xmarkd400x]

Re: CHFF: Mismatch of the Century

Somebody didn't do their math...

None of the above items represent a 5-game advantage...

• 9-3 vs 4-4 is only a 3-game difference.
• 9-0 vs 4-3 is only 4 games.
• 9-1 vs 3-1 is only 3 games.

The way to compute this is to add teh difference between wins and losses and divide it by half, although you must be careful if the "lesser" record actually has fewer losses or more wins (offset by even more wins or losses respectively). This is not the cae here.

I noticed it too, but I understood what they meant. Good catch.

 

[QuinielaBox]

Re: CHFF: Mismatch of the Century

They still have to play the game Sunday.

Anything can happen.

Brady has 4 picks, Patriots have 6 turnovers, the defense is flat. Special Teams gives up two touchdowns.

Belichick gets outcoached by Coughlin.

And the Patriots get labeled the biggest chokers in the history of sports and I go back and get chided by the Steeler and Bronco fans at my sports bar.

A lot can go wrong here. Do we want to be compared to the 1934 Bears?