Idiot opposing fans complaining about our strength of schedule next year

[PatsFanSince74]

The following appeared on the Associated Press Wire this morning:

"NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, after consultation with Franchise Owners Bisciotti, Blank, Irsay, and McNair, determined that it is 'more likely than not that the 2017/18 schedule of the New England Patriots is too easy'.

"As a result, the Commissioner decreed that star Patriot Quarterback Tom Brady be suspended for the first four games of the 2017 season, 'Just to give everybody else a darn chance.'

"When asked to explain why the Patriots still won the 2016/17 Super Bowl after Brady was suspended for the first four games of the prior season, the Commissioner appeared confused and replied, 'Gosh. Yeah. I forgot. I'll have to get back to you on that."

"Members of the media are now trying to confirm that a man fitting Goodell's description was seen being dragged out of NFL League Headquarters in a straitjacket, screaming incoherently about a 'Clown T-shirt'"

 

[XLIX]

So will the Broncos be back in Foxboro in 2018?

Only if they and the Patriots finish in the same spot in their divisions. Otherwise they won't play.

This is our third year in a row playing there right? Isn't that how it works?

And also, why the F is that the pattern? It seems unfair to have it 3-3-3 why not just have it alternate? I know it is nice when they are at your place three years in a row, but playing at mile high 3 years in a row sucks. I know that's the rule, but the rule seems to suck.

Any of you gurus can explain to me why it doesn't suck?

You can't have it alternate for everyone. It *has* to be this way.

 

[Spiral]

Broncos shouldn't be complaining too much--2017 will be the third year in a row that the Patriots play at Denver during the regular season.

 

[Raymond]

I agree with those fans. The Pats always have an easier schedule.......because every year the Pats are stuck playing the teams those fans root for.

Is there an alternate universe where just for once the pats can end up 500?

 

[archstanton543]

Is there an alternate universe where just for once the pats can end up 500?

That almost happened in 2002....and they were under BB and had a losing season in 2000.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Broncos shouldn't be complaining too much--2017 will be the third year in a row that the Patriots play at Denver during the regular season.

And the second year in a row they will miss the playoffs

 

[pazrul72]

So will the Broncos be back in Foxboro in 2018? This is our third year in a row playing there right? Isn't that how it works?

And also, why the F is that the pattern? It seems unfair to have it 3-3-3 why not just have it alternate? I know it is nice when they are at your place three years in a row, but playing at mile high 3 years in a row sucks. I know that's the rule, but the rule seems to suck.

Any of you gurus can explain to me why it doesn't suck?

It's because of how the AFC division rotates. In theory we would only play Denver once every 3 years when the AFC West comes up. So to make sure that flips one home one away every 3 years, you get abnormal streaks if both teams end the same place division wise. Take Oakland for instances....we never play them because they have sucked for so long and the pats don't. The way ît is done now say we play them year one and year four, year one is in Oakland year four is in foxborough. If you alternated years it would be possible to play them years one, three, four, five, the following one, and the following three giving Oakland five out of six home games. The way it's done now the most a team can get is three. In theory it works better because the odds of the same two teams being in the same spot in their division three years in a row is low. Just so happens the pats always win their division.

 

[denverpatsfan]

Nest season's schedule is BRUTAL. I'm not sure why anyone would complain. Pats will be lucky to win 10 games.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Nest season's schedule is BRUTAL. I'm not sure why anyone would complain. Pats will be lucky to win 10 games.

I think we'll do better than THAT...

 

[BradyFTW!]

SOS is rubbish. What relevance does the season prior have to the upcoming season?

We do this every year. Going into this year, people would complain that some team lucked out by getting to play the Raiders instead of the Broncos, or the Cowboys instead of the Redskins, etc. and every year within like 4 weeks it's conclusively shown that the various assumptions made in this judgment were all nonsense. And somehow people never learn.

 

[sb1]

Maybe it's just me but I don't think the schedule next year is easy at all.

 

[neuronet]

You can't have it alternate for everyone. It *has* to be this way.

This sounds very strange. You are saying mathematically, it is impossible to alternate? That is very counterintuitive to me. I'm not doubting you, this is why I love math/logic because it sometimes violates my expectations. Is there a proof somewhere I'd like to see it. When I work it out with little simple scenarios, it seems to work out fine alternating, I'm very curious how it blows up with more complex scenarios

E.g., here is one simple scenario: to simplify let's say it is Broncos, Texans, and Steelers each year (along with Pats of course). Four top AFC teams each have to play each other, that is six games a season.

Y1 (each letter is shorthand for team name, so P=Pats, B=Broncs, etc)
PB
PT
SP
ST
TB
BS

Y2: naively, why can't we just switch all of those ?
BP
TP
PS
TS
BT
SB

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Just remember that you have two, orthogonal home/away cycles interacting.

There's the home/away cycle for playing the entire rotating AFC division and the home away/cycle for playing the teams in the other two AFC divisions that finished in the same position you did.

You can't treat it as one big cycle.

 

[Raymond]

That almost happened in 2002....and they were under BB and had a losing season in 2000.

I'm talking this century only.

 

[neuronet]

It's because of how the AFC division rotates. In theory we would only play Denver once every 3 years when the AFC West comes up. So to make sure that flips one home one away every 3 years, you get abnormal streaks if both teams end the same place division wise. Take Oakland for instances....we never play them because they have sucked for so long and the pats don't. The way ît is done now say we play them year one and year four, year one is in Oakland year four is in foxborough. If you alternated years it would be possible to play them years one, three, four, five, the following one, and the following three giving Oakland five out of six home games. The way it's done now the most a team can get is three. In theory it works better because the odds of the same two teams being in the same spot in their division three years in a row is low. Just so happens the pats always win their division.

This is useful I didn't see this before I posted my tinker-toy example

 

[XLIX]

This sounds very strange. You are saying mathematically, it is impossible to alternate?

It is impossible to have everyone in the conference alternate. If you set it up perfectly for one division, you would completely screw over another.

That is very counterintuitive to me. I'm not doubting you, this is why I love math/logic because it sometimes violates my expectations. Is there a proof somewhere I'd like to see it. When I work it out with little simple scenarios, it seems to work out fine alternating, I'm very curious how it blows up with more complex scenarios

E.g., here is one simple scenario: to simplify let's say it is Broncos, Texans, and Steelers each year (along with Pats of course). Four top AFC teams each have to play each other, that is six games a season.

Y1 (each letter is shorthand for team name, so P=Pats, B=Broncs, etc)
PB
PT
SP
ST
TB
BS

Y2: naively, why can't we just switch all of those ?
BP
TP
PS
TS
BT
SB

Because this would completely mess up things for other teams in the conference. I'll type up a more thorough explanation is a short while.

 

[JMC00]

pittsburgh

Sorry but Pittsburgh is not a tough team for the Pats. They just aren't. That team is Brady's *****.

 

[jmt57]

Take the Patriots out of this, and it should be relatively to grasp. It's not rocket science.

Team A finishes 16-0 (or 15-1, or 14-2, or 13-3, etc).
They don't have to face themselves.
Therefore their SOS is 'easier' than other teams that do have to face Team A.

Team B finishes 1-15 (or some similarly poor record).
Team B cannot face Team B.
Therefore they don't benefit from having that 1-15 team on their schedule, like other teams do.


Problem is that those with an agenda (fans of other teams and sports talk radio hosts) don't want to deal with facts or rational logic. As a result this misplaced angst is guaranteed to reappear on an annual or semi-annual basis.

 

[XLIX]

@neuronet I enjoy these sorts of math/logic puzzles too (and have actually had this conversation in this forum before so I am going to borrow from my own posts). Here is why it has to be the way it is:

We know 6 games are against the division and 4 against the NFC, so let's throw those out. We also rotate through the other 3 AFC divisions every 3 years. For example, in 2017 we play the AFCW (home against KC and SD, on the road against Oak and Den). We will play the AFCW again in 2020, reversing the home team of 2017 (so in 2020 we are home against Oak and Dev, on the road against KC and SD).

So the trick is how do you schedule the 2 "positional" games every year? (By "positional game" I mean the game where the Patriots play 1 team from another AFC division who finished in the same position the previous year).

Here are the position games for the AFC East for 6 years. The challenge is to construct them in such a way that you do not have 2 consecutive home or 2 consecutive away games with one division.

2014: North, South
2015: North, West
2016: South, West
2017: North, South
2018: North, West
2019: South, West

So let's say we set it like this:

2014: North Home, South Away
2015: West Home, North Away
2016: South Home, West Away
2017: North Home, South Away
2018: West Home, North Away
2019: South Home, West Away

Here are the positional games for the AFC North:

2014: East, West
2015: East, South
2016: West, South
2017: East, West
2018: East, South
2019: West, South

Here's the impossible part: Construct those in such a way so that you do not have 2 consecutive home or 2 consecutive away games against one division AND it stays compatible with the schedule we already set up for the AFC East AND (needless to say) you have maintain the integrity of every team have 8 home games and 8 road games.

 

[ForThoseAboutToRock]

So how are you going to change the schedule?

... by cheating. duh! Kraft and Belichick are on the, uhh, competitive money schedule committee or whatever.