Frequently ignored factor in wins & losses

[PatsFan37]

In an article on nfl.com, Phil Simms says:

Why can't teams be up every week? I thought the same thing as a player. The answer is that teams are up every week -- but some weeks you're flying off the charts and it's impossible to sustain that kind of intensity. Circumstances dictate a lot in the NFL, and last week provided a few examples.

[... Simms talks about the Jags, Giants, and Redskins, and then says...]

It's incredible, but fans, radio talk-show hosts and pregame analysts never take into account who the teams have played or who they're playing. Unless you are really an elite team, the energy it takes to beat good teams cannot be underestimated. It wears on you.

The Jets, for example, put up a great effort in losing a close game to the Colts two weeks ago. Really, they had played very well the first four weeks. But they have to follow the Colts game by going down to Jacksonville to play a big, physical team that was coming off a loss -- a team with high expectations this year that was coming home after two tough road games.

In fairness, I think commentators understand this, but in their urgency to find flaws and create controversy, they'd rather not focus on logic.

For example, I've frequently heard that the Patriots should have dispatched Miami more easily, and have heard little how the huge win over the Bengals would necessarily produce some letdown.

What makes the Patriots great is their ability, for the most part, to avoid the highs and lows that cause teams to lose games they should win. That's why the playoff game in Denver last year was something you'd expect of the Colts or the Eagles, and why it was an aberration coming from the Patriots.

 

[Digger44]

In an article on nfl.com, Phil Simms says:
In fairness, I think commentators understand this, but in their urgency to find flaws and create controversy, they'd rather not focus on logic.

For example, I've frequently heard that the Patriots should have dispatched Miami more easily, and have heard little how the huge win over the Bengals would necessarily produce some letdown.

What makes the Patriots great is their ability, for the most part, to avoid the highs and lows that cause teams to lose games they should win. That's why the playoff game in Denver last year was something you'd expect of the Colts or the Eagles, and why it was an aberration coming from the Patriots.

ya good thing we avoided that Cinci low. I gotta say that i think you are going way to far with the logic. if bb could have mistake free football every week he would chose it instead of balancing a high or a low. bb has a game plan every week and success is rated on whether or not the team reaches the gameplan, not the result of a balanced high or low. if you take this too far it makes the Pats look stupid this year. Yes we are 4-1, but we have not played good ball except 1 game. that means that the denver game was a low. buff, miami, jets were all balanced??? no way. those were ugly games with many mistakes. i am not buying it, esp from phil simms.

 

[BelichickFan]

It was a very real fact that Miami was playing for it's season. That fact had me worried. And we weathered their somewhat improved passing attack from the first half to shut them out in the second. All was fine in that game for me.

 

[PatsFan37]

ya good thing we avoided that Cinci low. I gotta say that i think you are going way to far with the logic. if bb could have mistake free football every week he would chose it instead of balancing a high or a low. bb has a game plan every week and success is rated on whether or not the team reaches the gameplan, not the result of a balanced high or low. if you take this too far it makes the Pats look stupid this year. Yes we are 4-1, but we have not played good ball except 1 game. that means that the denver game was a low. buff, miami, jets were all balanced??? no way. those were ugly games with many mistakes. i am not buying it, esp from phil simms.

You're missing the point. It's not that execution doesn't matter or that talent doesn't matter. Of course they're the biggest factors. It's that the order of the schedule, the effect of a series of away games, the impact of a huge win or loss, these do matter as well, but are too frequently ignored entirely.

Competitors are right to fear playing Brady after he's had a bad game. He tends to light up his next opponent.

Did you even read Simms article, or did you dismiss it entirely because you don't like the man?

 

[hughthehand]

One thing that no one is talking about concerning the Bears Visit to Foxboro. It is there 3rd consecutive road game. They play the Giants and Jets in New York, then come here. I do not know the exact stats, but winning the 3rd game of a 3 game road trip is very, very low in the NFL.

That should be a game the Pats win.

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

One thing that no one is talking about concerning the Bears Visit to Foxboro. It is there 3rd consecutive road game. They play the Giants and Jets in New York, then come here. I do not know the exact stats, but winning the 3rd game of a 3 game road trip is very, very low in the NFL.

That should be a game the Pats win.

I remember in 2001 the Dolphins played a good Indy team at home on MNF, then flew across the country to play SF. So the Dolphins played on the road on short rest. SF (they were playoff-caliber then) ran the ball down Miami's throat. Miami followed that game up with a *Saturday* game in Foxboro, so the fish had to fly back across the country and go on the road for a 2nd week in a row, both on short rest. The Pats also ran the ball down Miami's throat. If I was a Dolphins fan, I would have been ripsh*t when the schedule came out.

Scheduling indeed is an important factor and I think Chicago is going to find this out come November.

Regards,
Chris

 

[Digger44]

You're missing the point. It's not that execution doesn't matter or that talent doesn't matter. Of course they're the biggest factors. It's that the order of the schedule, the effect of a series of away games, the impact of a huge win or loss, these do matter as well, but are too frequently ignored entirely.

Competitors are right to fear playing Brady after he's had a bad game. He tends to light up his next opponent.

Did you even read Simms article, or did you dismiss it entirely because you don't like the man?

no, i get what your saying, but i dont put weight into it. you have to hold a consistant standard. if brady has a great game then the opposing team should fear him less. that is the inverse of what you said, but i don't believe it to be true. i can see some of the points made by the article, however our huge win streak and 3 SB kind of defies the idea, doesnt it?

 

[hughthehand]

In the Article, Simms mentions that when you are NOT an elite team, it takes so much effort to win.

I think in our Back to Back superbowl seasons, we were THE elite team.

Also, in 2001, there was some stat about how almost every team we played, loss the week after, and most coaches attributed that to how physical we were.

 

[arrellbee]

PatsFan37
Thanks for the link and the comments. Really significant to consider that there are so many factors that go into a team's success - on any given Sunday, for the season, and for the playoffs.