Are we legit? We have had 4th easiest schedule in league so far...

[mgcolby]

Also, I should clarify that when we say "tougher schedule", I mean THUS FAR. Looking down the stretch, I don't know if their schedule is tougher than NEs. But as this past week, it absolutely has been.

That leaves the Colts and Steelers. So do tell which one is it?

 

[SammyB29]

Ah, post 15! And now I can PM. So with that let me say:

I'm sure some of you have found me to be insufferable but please note that I'm not saying "this is ****, that's ****, the Pats are ****" etc, but instead arguing a very valid point. You may not agree with it, but you also simply can not dismiss it.

BUT, regardless, I still AM technically trolling, so I'll make this my last post and the clues as to the team I cheer for are laid out.

And now that I can PM, I will PM my team to MGColby since he was the one who seemed most interested.

I may not be a fan of the Pats, but as someone who spends entirely too much time surfing the net and reading football boards (including many other AFC teams) let me just say that this IS without a doubt one of, if not THE, most active boards, and easily one of the best.

Enjoy the rest of your schedule folks, Lord knows you must've enjoyed the peewee level one you've had thus far!

Bubye

 

[Lansdowne]

SOS can also appear weaker when you're contributing to the loss totals of the opponents on your schedule. Just saying.

 

[Dutchmaster617]

If 2 teams were both 7-0 right now and one had played the 7 worst teams in the league and one had played the 7 other best teams in the league, which one would you say was a more legit contender?*

The better one, put the 0-16 Lions in a position to somehow face the 16-0 Pats in a playoff game and they could rise to it, any given sunday in a team sport my man.

 

[mgcolby]

Ah, post 15! And now I can PM. So with that let me say:

I'm sure some of you have found me to be insufferable but please note that I'm not saying "this is ****, that's ****, the Pats are ****" etc, but instead arguing a very valid point. You may not agree with it, but you also simply can not dismiss it.

BUT, regardless, I still AM technically trolling, so I'll make this my last post and the clues as to the team I cheer for are laid out.

And now that I can PM, I will PM my team to MGColby since he was the one who seemed most interested.

I may not be a fan of the Pats, but as someone who spends entirely too much time surfing the net and reading football boards (including many other AFC teams) let me just say that this IS without a doubt one of, if not THE, most active boards, and easily one of the best.

Enjoy the rest of your schedule folks, Lord knows you must've enjoyed the peewee level one you've had thus far!

Bubye

Don't leave so fast? I figured it was them.

So here is what makes your argument pointless: While you have played a tough SoS based on actual team records, your opponents SoS has sucked. And has actually been enhanced by playing your team. Your team has played 1 team with a SoS over 600 and they are 2-5 and 1 team that has played a 500 SoS on the nose, which was enhanced by losing to both of our teams.

And for Comparison sake, we have played 5 teams who have a SoS of 500 or better and one of them was over 600. We play two teams in the next two weeks with a SoS over 600 and then the Colts who are at 545. So regardless of our opponents records all of them, with the exception of the Jets and Ravens, have played a 500 or better SoS. Do you think it is a coincidence that they are the only two with a winning record?

See how that doesn't work so well?

 

[Brady_12]

They've played teams with better records playing better football. Not teams like the bumbling stumbling Vikings and their past-expiry QB, the bumbling stumbling Chargers and their comedy of errors, the joke "back to normal" Bungles and the joke "I honestly hope they can turn things around" Bills.

I didn't ask you to define it. I asked you to back it up. Still waiting...

 

[pdangle]

Re: Are we legit? We have had 4eth easiest schedule in league so far...

Absolutely true. And no one is going to pretend the Pats should have to give up those Ws or something just because they played a bunch of crap teams. They're Ws all the same.

BUT

When it comes time to talk about who the top teams in the league are, you DO have to take it into effect.

If 2 teams were both 7-0 right now and one had played the 7 worst teams in the league and one had played the 7 other best teams in the league, which one would you say was a more legit contender?*

You can't ignore SOS. And there is no more valid SOS than the most current one.

Sorry, but yes you can. If the 7-0 team won each game by only a point, and the 0-7 team had lost each game by a point, then for all intents and purposes the difference in their respective strengths would be almost negligible.

Now if the 7-0 team had won each game by +X1 avg points, but that team's opponents each had lost all their games by an average of -X2 points, and the 0-7 team lost each game by -Y1 points, but that team's opponents had each won all their games by an average of +Y2 points, and if X1 + X2 < Y1 + Y2 then statistically the 0-7 team is actually stronger than the 7-0. Unless secondary opponent scoring and point differential scoring are considered, the basic W-L SOS stat is useless.

Lastly if the 7-0 team goes 0-9 the rest of the way, and the 0-7 does the opposite, each with average expected scoring differentials for each W or L, then when analyzed from a more accurate point in the season (the end, which has twice as many games and approximately 4x the statistical significance), the 0-7 would again finish as a stronger opponent. This is why talent is used to evaluate teams. It better reflects what the final records and point differentials of each team will eventually gravitate toward.

So yes while your basic WL SOS can be used to very, very, VERY roughly adjust team WL records, it is so very weak that it cannot be used to support the argument you are trying to make.

You need to come back with much more than that, son.

 

[Patjew]

Re: Are we legit? We have had 4eth easiest schedule in league so far...

This thread makes me sad.

 

[Gwedd]

Re: Are we legit? We have had 4eth easiest schedule in league so far...

This thread makes me sad.

Me too.... It's like fantasy football on steroids.

The ONLY stat that matters is the W to L ratio. Everything else is meaningless.

EVERY team is capable of beating ANY other team on ANY Sunday.

 

[Nikolai]

I hear this song and dance every year the Pats are doing well. Everyone says, well, "such and such" team will be the TRUE test. After the Pats beat them, then it's "well, that team got exposed, so the NEXT team is the TRUE test".

Btw, yeah, the 3-5 Chargers really suck. Just ask Tennessee.

 

[Bostonian1962]

@Miami, Baltimore, @San Diego, Minnesota

We won all those in a row. How can you look at that and wonder if we are legit?

You are correct. This proves that SOS means little. You look at their schedule, and you see alot of talented teams that they've had to play. AND, they have won six of seven of those games.

 

[resdubwhite]

I looked at the patriots schedule at the start of the season and said wow. If they start at 5/3 thats a great shot to get into the play offs. Now. I see the Patriots are close to a 7/1 start.

There is a real danger of over analysing these stats. There have been 2 really big away wins in that aswell.

 

[Ice Cold Bruschi]

We'll know exactly where we stand by the end of December

 

[BTTA]

Re: Are we legit? We have had 4eth easiest schedule in league so far...

This thread makes me sad.

Me, too. That there is someone out there who has a need to go to another team's board and vent all that frustration. And knowing that it will only be met with hostility.

A desperate move trying to fill an empty life.

I enjoy being a fan and can get overzealous, but that degree of personal identification with a sport team begs for medical intervention.

 

[dhamz]

OH NO!!! The Pats strength of schedule is weak? Does this mean we might not get into a BCS bowl?

 

[MassPats38]

Ah, the excuses of the woulda, coulda, shoulda team fans. I love it.

SOS means something looking back at a season as it tells you how many teams on the schedule made the playoffs. As playoff teams oftentimes return to the playoffs the next season, that may be an indicator at the beginning of the season as to difficulty, but not a great indicator as all teams change in the offseason, for better or worse. As a running indicator during the season, that metric is utterly useless given the fact good divisions may match up with good divisions (see AFC East v. NFC North and AFC East v. AFC North), and those good teams will incur losses, reducing the overall SOS at any given time.

So if you are a fan of a 7-9 team, take heart that it may be the greatest 7-9 team in the history of the NFL based on SOS when you are watching the playoffs from home. There is always something to be said for setting the bar for mediocrity.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

This team is definitely legit. I do question the statements that we are the best team in the league that were thrown around last week based off record. Same way I was question whether the Chiefs and Bucs are better than the Saints for example. We will find out over the next few weeks against the Steelers, Colts, Jets, etc if we really are the best right now.

That said, the fact that such a young team is winning all these close games is very encouraging. IMO it's better than going out there and winning every game by 30. You couldn't have asked for a better first half, as long as we beat the Browns. And I will be there in Cleveland Sunday right behind the Patriots bench to make sure of it

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

I didn't realize that the league awarded Ws and Ls based on depth charts! Who cares how much "talent" there is if that talent isnt producing?

You're trying to tell me the Vikings are a good team???

And when SD kept making mistakes that peewee kids wouldn't be stupid enough to make, none of them counted because SD has talent right?

Face it guys, you've run up against TWO teams that are/were playing high level football when you played them. The Ravens and the Jets. One lost to you, one didn't.

The rest of the teams you've played are all bumbling and stumbling over themselves this year. Regardless of their talent, SD has been playing losing because they screw up all the time. Regardless of their talent, the Vikings have been awful and find ways to lose. Buffalo is a joke. Cinci is a joke. Miami is a decent team but not yet good enough to be a playoff team.

So why not just face it? The pats have played 2 good teams. Teams that are playing winning football. They're .500 against them.

Keep hanging on to last years numbers all you want. I'm sure at the end of the year when Minnesota missed the playoffs the league will let them in anyways based on last years numbers. Right?? Right??

Hey

Does anyone know which village lost it's idiot?

Opponents are 21-29. Well six of those losses are to the Patroits

20-23

Buffalo is 0-7

20-16

Would you rather have to go play the 3-5 Chargers at home of the "NFC best" Tampa bay Bucs 5-2 in Tampa?

Best way to compare us vs Jets and Steelers is common games and common opponents. Week 2/ in Miami/ Baltimore

 

[RussFrancis]

Does our schedule honestly get nitpicked because of wins over MN, SD, Cinci and Miami? Buffalo, we'd obviously all concede. So, lets ask some questions.

1 - Who else beat MN by 10 points? No one.
2 - Who else beat SD in San Diego? No one.
3 - Who else beat Miami by 27? No one.
4 - Who else beat Cinci by 14? No one.

Now, who else is 6 and 1? You know the answer.

 

[Kid~Brady]

Don't know where you got your figures from but as far as i know the pats have the fifth hardest schedual in 2010. Does cinncy, the jets, Miami, Balmore, SD, and Minny sound like a cuo cake schedual to you? Clue most of them were near or at the top this year, and were not done.

According to NFL.com, we have the 6th hardest sceldule in the league... yep, SOS is trash
Steelers have the 23rd hardest scehdule...