Fun fact of the day

[NextGenBoys]

Since 1940, there have been 744 games where a team has scored 28 points or more in the first half. That team has gone on to win 715 (96.1%)

Since 2000, there have been 201 games where a team has scored 28 points or more in the first half. That team has gone on to win 194 (96.5%)

Only one other team has ended up losing by more than 10 points - Cincy 31 vs Buffalo 49 in 2010

Does anyone else notice how often we find ourselves in stats like this?

THAT is why our losses always sting so much.

 

[HoustonSucks]

No offense to the OP but I hate these stats. Thanks. lol.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Nobody expected a win. But if you have a 14 point lead, more than once, it is not too outlandish to be disappointed.

No but we are not a very good time right now and bad teams find ways to lose. That's where we are at right now.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Well, we should. It was a pretty significant screw up by the entire team. Not just Weeden or whomever people choose to blame. It just goes to show you how inept you have to be to blow that kind of lead. We almost had to go out our own way to blow it.

But when you are missing 6 of your best players.... You're suppose to be inept. Yesterday's team is not the team
We started with or the one we'll finish with.

 

[Cowboy4ever]

We have nothing out side of 83 to pose a threat down the field, and he is not much of one at that. We have no QB, our we have two starters on the DL and our best 3 passrushers not dressing for games. Our MLB is out. Our Best Defender missed 2 or 3 series in the second halve as well. I am just as disappointed as everyone else.. when we got out to that start, I was like ,, we actually have a chance.. only to be let down. But we really had no business even competing, I thought our whole game would look like the 2nd half looked. Anyway, its over, on to the Saints.. this is a game I think we can and should win, esp if Brees is out.

 

[jazzcat22]

Since 1940, there have been 744 games where a team has scored 28 points or more in the first half. That team has gone on to win 715 (96.1%)

Since 2000, there have been 201 games where a team has scored 28 points or more in the first half. That team has gone on to win 194 (96.5%)

Only one other team has ended up losing by more than 10 points - Cincy 31 vs Buffalo 49 in 2010

Somehow I get a feeling that there are some so called fans on this forum that will take some enjoyment of those stats.
Not a gut feeling, just a history of past posts.

 

[percyhoward]

Since 1940, there have been 744 games where a team has scored 28 points or more in the first half. That team has gone on to win 715 (96.1%)

Since 2000, there have been 201 games where a team has scored 28 points or more in the first half. That team has gone on to win 194 (96.5%)

Only one other team has ended up losing by more than 10 points - Cincy 31 vs Buffalo 49 in 2010

Since 2000, there have been 167 games where a team had 0 TD passes and 1 INT in the game, and did not score in the 2nd half. That team has won 6 (3.6%)

 

[black label]

No offense to the OP but I hate these stats. Thanks. lol.

 

[TheDude]

Since 2000, there have been 167 games where a team had 0 TD passes and 1 INT in the game, and did not score in the 2nd half. That team has won 6 (3.6%)

I got 156 and 5 wins in that criteria, but not sure this is a great contextual stat. You have to wait until the end of the game to ensure the team actually doesnt score. Also, 0 passing TD and no score in the second half is a tad autocorrelated a, but ehh

That said, using your criteria, not one of those teams put up 28 points. 1 put up 26 (Tenn lost by 1 to Balt in 2006). No other team put up more than 17. there was only one team using your criteria that scored 4 Rushing TDs and lost

Scoring 28 points in the first half is usually enough

 

[Risen Star]

Nobody expected a win. But if you have a 14 point lead, more than once, it is not too outlandish to be disappointed.

When it was 28-17 and we stopped them on their opening drive of the 2nd half to get the ball back at midfield, I expected a win.

And then Witten false started and it all went to bleep.

 

[percyhoward]

Not one of those teams put up 28 points.

Right. Like you, I had to leave out some extremely important information to get the result I wanted.

 

[TheDude]

Right. Like you, I had to leave out some extremely important information to get the result I wanted.

yeah i had one criteria. It correlates to "starting fast" - I didnt have to dig multivariate autocorrelated criteria to "prove a point" . Good try though, attaboy

 

[Alexander]

When it was 28-17 and we stopped them on their opening drive of the 2nd half to get the ball back at midfield, I expected a win.

And then Witten false started and it all went to bleep.

I guess it was Witten's fault then. However you want to ignore the big picture for the minutiae.

 

[Risen Star]

No offense to the OP but I hate these stats. Thanks. lol.

Yeah the fact that he finds these facts fun is proof he's a fake Cowboys fan.

 

[Risen Star]

I guess it was Witten's fault then. However you want to ignore the big picture for the minutiae.

I didn't say it was Witten's fault. Just that he false started and the game wasn't the same after that.

Yes, there should have been an adjustment of nicknames on defense in the 2nd half, Rod willing, but I can't shake the fact that if our QB was anything but complete crap we win that game.

You can keep banging the drum on the defense's failure but I damn sure have more faith in that group going forward than I do that waste of space, loser under center.

 

[percyhoward]

yeah i had one criteria. It correlates to "starting fast" - I didnt have to dig multivariate autocorrelated criteria to "prove a point" . Good try though, attaboy

To connect the dots, the fact that we scored zero 2nd-half points actually meant something.

 

[TheDude]

To connect the dots, the fact that we scored zero 2nd-half points actually meant something.

What would scoring 7 points have meant exactly? and double down...what if it was a passing TD?

 

[Alexander]

I didn't say it was Witten's fault. Just that he false started and the game wasn't the same after that.

Yes, there should have been an adjustment of nicknames on defense in the 2nd half, Rod willing, but I can't shake the fact that if our QB was anything but complete crap we win that game.

You can keep banging the drum on the defense's failure but I damn sure have more faith in that group going forward than I do that waste of space, loser under center.

Then just sign off the rest of the season then.

No team that scores 28 with Weeden at QB and gets that special kind of gift and fails to seize that opportunity has any business thinking about being in the playoffs.

Yes. It is understood that Weeden is utter garbage.

But when you have said garbage and score 28? You deserve to be clowned if you lose.

You could give Quincy Carter at his worst and expect to win with that.

This was on Garrett and the staff.

 

[muck4doo]

No offense to the OP but I hate these stats. Thanks. lol.

Agreed. I'm not finding any fun in these "facts". Where is the fun OP?

 

[TheDude]

Agreed. I'm not finding any fun in these "facts". Where is the fun OP?

Sarcasm

Too soon i suppose