![]() |
Sagarin Stats, PATs a surprise
This is a site that I have followed for many years now.
The rating system has been pretty good over the years and tends to zero in towards the latter part of the year. The surprise is PATs even with a 5-2 record are 21st in the league! Why? Because PATs have not played a Top 16 team yet this year! Even the Colts are not in top 16. That means PATs 5 wins are against bottom dwellers. So question comes up ... is PATs soft schedule giving us a false sense of accomplishment? USATODAY.com |
Re: Sagarin Stats, PATs a surprise
Quote:
I agree that we need to play better teams to get a more complete sense of what we've got here in 2008, but to say that 20 teams are better than us is a stretch as far as I'm concerned. |
Re: Sagarin Stats, PATs a surprise
Quote:
Who cares, as long as we get into the Play-Offs. We knew 8 months ago we had an "easy" schedule - and it's not our Fault the Colts and Chargers can't seem to put together two good games. |
Re: Sagarin Stats, PATs a surprise
These power ranking lists and stats based on power ranking lists are pretty annoying. I mean, as a fan, I'd like the Pats to be near the top to take pride in the team, but really, they are meaningless information.
Other than wins, wins in the division, and wins in the conference, who really cares? And so far those numbers show us to be a lot better than #20. |
Re: Sagarin Stats, PATs a surprise
Don't really care, in fact it worked out since we were breaking in a new quarterback. If we had to play a tougher schedule in the first seven games who knows what would have happened.
|
Re: Sagarin Stats, PATs a surprise
Quote:
I stand by my belief that most games this year are a crap shoot as inconsistency (and most teams have it) does not support predictability. Those calculations are based on assumptions on schedule and performance that may not determine outcomes of games. |
Re: Sagarin Stats, PATs a surprise
AN EXERCIZE
print the list and cover with black marker all the teams you care about, positively and negatively. When I do this, I find the power ratings are better predictors of future than won-loss records. =========== Ultimately, I agree all that matters is winning the next game, winning the division and getting into the playoffs. |
Re: Sagarin Stats, PATs a surprise
Quote:
|
Re: Sagarin Stats, PATs a surprise
Quote:
This is why I think every power poll no matter how elaborate they want to get with their formulas are utter BS. P.S. the Pats can only play the teams on their schedule. If they are 5-2 with 5 wins against bad teams it is because that is who is on their schedule. |
Re: Sagarin Stats, PATs a surprise
Personally, I do not think it should come as a suprise that, although they are improving, the PATs are not a top 10 team at the moment. It would be a miracle, considering the injury list ( e.g. top 3 RBs hurt last week) for them to be so. Without an easier schedule this year I think are record would be similar to the colts or worse ( and in reality the COlts should be 2-5). Fortunately, because of that easier schedule so far, what is important is where the team is in November/December. This definitely is a team that is improving and starting to get a new identity, but arguing with Sagarin's stats for their performance over the whole season is a little different to me than with ESPn's talking clueless heads. The other good thing this season is I think there is no clear front-runner that will be impossble for a 10-6 team at the end of the season to be able to beat
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:39 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 © Copyright 2000-2012. PatsFans.com Is a Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties. This site is owned and operated by I&K Internet Design Enterprises, LLC
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
The opinions posted in this forum do not necessarily reflect the opinions of our staff at PatsFans.com or USA Today.
We are not affiliated with the New England Patriots™ or the NFL™. The Photo Used In the header was taken by Ian Logue.