All 8 of the Cowboys SB teams won their season finale

[KJJ]

This thread is stupid. I am now stupider for participating.

What's stupid about posting a stat? You're reading way too much into it, that's what's stupid.

 

[tyke1doe]

The beauty and horror of the entire "Did we mail in Week 17 and will it hurt us" line of thinking is if we blow the doors off Green Bay/New York/Detroit, it will amount to a hill of beans and nothing more than a footnote. If we lay an egg against Green Bay/New York/Detroit, we'll have an entire offseason to debate/argue/discuss why we loss and who or what is/was at fault. In summary, we'll have enough conversation fodder to make this place lively until the draft and beyond.

 

[DogFace]

What's stupid about posting a stat? You're reading way too much into it, that's what's stupid.

You said in the other thread that 10 years was the relevant time frame for a teams history. In that thread you discredited all our Super Bowl teams and said 10 years is what's meaningful.

We have a very strong possibility of winning it all. Your negative energy has no bearing on that. You may have to deal with both of these facts.

We will be favorites in all of our remaining games.

 

[KJJ]

What does "pretty large" mean? Is this sample size adequate to see a significant difference here? Also, are there other confounding variables that should be controlled for? For example, did the previous Cowboys Super Bowl champions have anything to play for in that final game? This years team of course did not. Did previous Super Bowl teams use starters or backups in that final game?

Additionally, why wouldn't you include the rest of the league in this analysis? The previous Super Bowls were won under different ownership and different coaches. You could argue that the current iteration of the Cowboys has more in common with all the Super Bowl champions of the past ten years then Cowboys teams from ~20-50 years ago.

Finally, wouldn't you want to compare these numbers to Super Bowl losers as well. Is it possible that winning the last game correlates with making the Super Bowl regardless of whether you win or lose? Under a league wide analysis of course. ;-)

Eight SB appearances is a pretty large sample size and everyone of those SB teams won their regular season finale. That could bother some that are superstitious. I didn't include the rest of the league because it would take too much time and the history of other teams doesn't have anything to do with our history. If it will make you feel better do your own comparisons and see what correlates with winning SB's and what doesn't.

 

[Doomsday101]

You have to look at your own history. Buffalo went to 4 SB's and lost everyone of them and so did the Vikings. It's pattern those teams developed and couldn't escape. Not saying that will happen to us but we have yet to reach a SB after losing our season finale.

those past Dallas teams have nothing to do with the current team hell Dak was 1 year old in one of the season you mentioned. Buffalo was the same team with the same key players. Sure for Buffalo they were chasing demons but it was the same cast of players.

I would add those 8 SB of the Cowboys were different coaches as well.

 

[DogFace]

Eight SB appearances is a pretty large sample size and everyone of those SB teams won their regular season finale. That could bother some that are superstitious. I didn't include the rest of the league because it would take too much time and the history of other teams doesn't have anything to do with our history. If it will make you feel better do your own comparisons and see what correlates with winning SB's and what doesn't.

Answer why you said 10 years in the other thread.

 

[KJJ]

You said in the other thread that 10 years was the relevant time frame for a teams history.

In that thread you discredited all our Super Bowl teams and said 10 years is what's meaningful. We have a very strong possibility of winning it all. Your negative energy has no bearing on that. You may have to deal with both of these facts.

We will be favorites in all of our remaining games.

You're getting everything all twisted, let's see the post.

 

[KJJ]

Answer why you said 10 years in the other thread.

Let's see the post, then ask away.

 

[BourbonBalz]

That's because the NFL has always been a QB driven league. Usually when you get to the playoffs and SB those games come down to the QB. A lot of those teams that had rushing champs had average QBs. Peterson, Dickerson, Sanders, Earl Campbell just to name a few. Emmitt had a HOF QB.

I don't know how old you are but this statement is WRONG. It has been for the past 2-3 decades or so, but in the 1970's and prior it was most definitely NOT a QB driven league.

 

[KJJ]

those past Dallas teams have nothing to do with the current team hell Dak was 1 year old in one of the season you mentioned.

None of those past Cowboys teams had anything to do with the other past Cowboys teams, some were decades apart. Again, you're reading too much into this.

 

[slomoxn]

I'm reading all these posts about what this team didn't do right or what they should have done and how everyone thinks Dakota or Romo should be leading the team. I swear most people would have been happier if this team went 6-10, at least then their misery would be justified and there wouldn't be any dissention on the board about what this team needs. They are 13-3 for goodness sakes and people are actually whining and moaning about it, I don't care what anyone says Cleveland fans have it all over Dallas fans, at least they have a reason to whine and moan their failure, regardless they are there every freaking week supporting there team. This team is succeeding and the whining and moaning is still prevalent on Cowboys sites, and we wonder why they all hate Dallas fans. Good Lord!!! We have been bad for so long no one knows how to handle success anymore, and by bad I mean they get to the play offs and no one feels like they're going to win, we hope but with the past leadership it was constant nail biting and waiting for that moment, well seems the more things change the more they stay the same. Lol stay classy people, you sound like the AINTS!!!

 

[Doomsday101]

None of those past Cowboys teams had anything to do with the other past Cowboys teams, some were decades apart. Again, you're reading too much into this.

Maybe I am but you put this out there as if somehow by Dallas not winning the last game they will not make it. It is your post and seems most are viewing it the same way.

 

[DogFace]

Let's see the post, then ask away.

You made the absurd argument for like 5 pages.You don't remember?

You're wasting your time and everyone else on here.

It didn't fit your narrative so you said it was not important.

Why did you want to "ruffle feathers" as you said?

What would be the purpose of trying to do that to "fellow fans" when we are in the middle of a historic season.

If as a fan your argument is we have plenty to worry about when we are 13-3. With one loss coming against our third string. Then when should we not worry and just be a confident fan?

 

[KJJ]

I don't know how old you are but this statement is WRONG. It has been for the past 2-3 decades or so, but in the 1970's and prior it was most definitely NOT a QB driven league.

The league has always been QB driven which is why QBs were going #1 overall decades ago just about as often as they are now. Jim Plunkett went #1 overall and so did Terry Bradshaw.

 

[KJJ]

Maybe I am but you put this out there as if somehow by Dallas not winning the last game they will not make it. It is your post and seems most are viewing it the same way.

That's your take. I've said repeatedly said it doesn't mean this Cowboys team won't make it to the SB.

 

[BourbonBalz]

The league has always been QB driven which is why QBs were going #1 overall decades ago just about as often as they are now. Jim Plunkett went #1 overall and so did Terry Bradshaw.

No. The league was ground driven. RBs were valued as much if not more than QBs back then. Most QBs back then didn't throw over 18-20 times per game if that much.

 

[rynochop]

Refreah my memory, how many of those players from 76 play on this team? Lol

Yeah, dumb stat..how many of those teams won their first game, or fourth game, or ninth game. Momentum is overrated in the NFL. How many teams look like world beaters one week and garbage the next

 

[munkee]

Eight SB appearances is a pretty large sample size and everyone of those SB teams won their regular season finale. That could bother some that are superstitious. I didn't include the rest of the league because it would take too much time and the history of other teams doesn't have anything to do with our history. If it will make you feel better do your own comparisons and see what correlates with winning SB's and what doesn't.

Once again what does "pretty large" mean? It sounds like you are saying that the sample size is large enough to say that the results are significant. Is this correct? Have you done a power analysis to back that up? In terms of significance, what statistical analysis did you do? Maybe an exact test of goodness of fit? What was the p value? Did you control for any other variables?

I don't need to do any additional analysis. I'm just trying to point out the the flaws in your logic. Data can fool you, even if it looks straight forward. If I was to guess, I would say that winning the last game of the regular season probably does correlate with the likelihood of a playoff team winning the Super Bowl. Even though that seems logical, it is only a guess. Which is all your statement is as well.

 

[DogFace]

Maybe I am but you put this out there as if somehow by Dallas not winning the last game they will not make it. It is your post and seems most are viewing it the same way.

His goal is obviously to attempt to bumb some fans out with anything negative he can think up.

He barely posts when we win.(He was gone for weeks during our 2014 run) He just couldn't take it anymore so he has a new strategy. Yes. It's immature and lame, but it makes him happy. So let's just try our best to entertain him.

 

[Doomsday101]

The league has always been QB driven which is why QBs were going #1 overall decades ago just about as often as they are now. Jim Plunkett went #1 overall and so did Terry Bradshaw.

It is a star driven league RB's Ricky Bell and Tony Dorsett were 1 and 2 overall draft picks in 1977.