Green Bay loss hard for pundits to take...

[wick]

There are so many flaws with that system that it's hard to know where to begin. Among the obvious:

1. The sample size for both teams was three games, which is statistically insignificant.

2. Any system that uses 27 percent of the available data and willfully ignores the other 73 percent is absurd. This isn't polling, where you can achieve a sample representative of the whole.

3. New England is treated as an equal opponent to whichever team is the last "quality" team in the league.

4. Scoring differential does not always reflect the character of a game. As an example, the Dallas-New England game was much more closely contested than the final score would indicate.

5. It ignores ebbs and flows within a season. A team that is currently a "quality" team may have been a "bad" team when played earlier in the season.

6. It completely ignores losses. A team could be 6-6 overall but have a 3-1 record against "quality" teams, making them just as good in the rankings as Dallas. Oh, wait. That actually *is* the case for Arizona.

7. The authors don't seem to believe their own metric. Here's a quote from the site:

"Arizona's third Quality Win came Sunday, with a surprising 27-21 victory over Cleveland.

We don't expect much out of the Cardinals. After all, two playoff victories in 87 years of NFL football pretty much tell you all you need to know about the organization that repeatedly invents new ways to lose."

If this is the rock-solid metric the authors claim, they should have no issue standing behind Arizona.

 

[kramskoi]

I wonder how NE's defense feels considering AJ Feely and Kyle Boller have just hung 20+ on them?

It's an offensive league. All but the most pathetic teams are going to score on everyone. That's just the way it is.

i'll let you tell it...offense will win the Superbowl this year...i posted this thread because of the "obvious" disconnect between cause and effect of the authors on that website.

 

[kramskoi]

There are so many flaws with that system that it's hard to know where to begin. Among the obvious:

1. The sample size for both teams was three games, which is statistically insignificant.

2. Any system that uses 27 percent of the available data and willfully ignores the other 73 percent is absurd. This isn't polling, where you can achieve a sample representative of the whole.

3. New England is treated as an equal opponent to whichever team is the last "quality" team in the league.

4. Scoring differential does not always reflect the character of a game. As an example, the Dallas-New England game was much more closely contested than the final score would indicate.

5. It ignores ebbs and flows within a season. A team that is currently a "quality" team may have been a "bad" team when played earlier in the season.

6. It completely ignores losses. A team could be 6-6 overall but have a 3-1 record against "quality" teams, making them just as good in the rankings as Dallas. Oh, wait. That actually *is* the case for Arizona.

7. The authors don't seem to believe their own metric. Here's a quote from the site:

"Arizona's third Quality Win came Sunday, with a surprising 27-21 victory over Cleveland.

We don't expect much out of the Cardinals. After all, two playoff victories in 87 years of NFL football pretty much tell you all you need to know about the organization that repeatedly invents new ways to lose."

If this is the rock-solid metric the authors claim, they should have no issue standing behind Arizona.

nice observations...glad i'm not the only one who sees the holes in the metrics...

 

[theogt]

Why would they look at record and margin of victory vs. "Quality Teams" when they could just look at common opponents? We played about 3-4 common opponents. That's certainly a large enough sample to gauge two teams head-to-head.

When you do that we had a larger MOV against common opponents.

 

[EPL0c0]

I agree. I was disappointed in how we seem to be hesitant when Brett went out of the game and Rogers entered the game. It was almost like the coaches and players were unsure of what to expect.

I think the defense did go very vanilla, but Rodgers is/was an unknown factor, so it was a safe move. If anything, it let Rodgers do some things... let's hope Oakland, St Louis, Chicago or Detriot can find weaknesses should Favre not be able to play (haha)

 

[Hostile]

Maybe I'm the only one who sees it?

 

[Chocolate Lab]

i'll let you tell it...offense will win the Superbowl this year...i posted this thread because of the "obvious" disconnect between cause and effect of the authors on that website.

No, your post was a good one to show how absurd some of the thinking out there is... Mine was directed at the people who keep complaining about our pass D because Rodgers and Campbell got some yards on us.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Dallas was 2-1 vs Quality teams
Green Bay was 3-0 vs Quality teams.

Of course Green Bay didn't play the Patriots and the Cowboys did.

This great system they have doesn't take the relative strength of the opponent into consideration.

What if team A that was 5-0 against this quality teams only face teams that were 6-5 while team B was 4-1 faced nothing but teams that were 11-0?

I call ID10T error of judgement.

 

[visionary]

i think that dallas was ready for rogers. when he came in, basically the cowboys felt that GB has an inexperienced QB and we have a 17 point lead. so instead of staying a 'blitzing' defense, backed off and became more of a 'coverage' defense relying on the front 3-4 to apply pressure. basically saying to GB:

we will take away the quick strike, we will give you some short stuff/ dink and dunk and tackle the pass catchers.

we dont think you can move the ball on us consistently and if you try you will trip up because of inexperience.

in the worst case, even if you are able to move the ball consistently (which is what happened), it will shorten the game (so each drive will take up 5+ minutes), we are already up by 17 and you cant stop our offense.

given all of the above, even in the worst case scenario, you cant come back and beat us.

that is exactly what happened.

just my .02

 

[Hoofbite]

Here are few facts that those apologists can chew on.

Cowboys 11-1

Packers 10-2


Other crap they spew doesn't mean squat.

I've heard these records of the teams is deadly accurate. Gonna have to find a couple sources to back that up though.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

No, your post was a good one to show how absurd some of the thinking out there is... Mine was directed at the people who keep complaining about our pass D because Rodgers and Campbell got some yards on us.

Yeah wink wink :

 

[ElGatoGrande]

I think the Cowboys recognized that they had a big lead, their offense was scoring at will, and the opposition was playing its backup QB,,, so they backed off and played prevent allowing Rodgers to throw all the short passes he wanted. NO BIG PLAYS was their goal and it worked, though I would hope in the future that they don't go into prevent until the 4th quarter,,, okay Wade? :

 

[Rack]

Green Bay's problem was Brett Favre throwing away the ball twice early
and
then going out with an injury.

1. Nevermind that Favre was pressured heavily on both those ints. They were thrown cuz HE screwed up, not cuz the Dallas' D did something to force the issue.




2. If they're gonna point out something the Pack did "to themselves" maybe they should point out the TD TO dropped (with NONE it being because of ANYTHING the packers did), and the failed 4th and 1. TO catches that pass and Barber runs that play instead of JuJo and we have 14 more points.

 

[mr.jameswoods]

I admire the Packers but I don't fear them in any regards. They are a marginal team that has played above their talent level. I just feel like they have played great football but that it's a team ready to implode at any given point. I still fear Seattle more than I do the Packers. I feel like the Seahawks are more talented and are starting to get healthy. I think Green Bay will start to slip. They were winning in large part to the momentum they were building. Now, we have hurt that momentum so I wouldn't be suprised if they lost again in the coming weeks or even in the playoffs prior to facing us. I think Seattle could beat Green Bay if they faced them in an early round of the playoffs.

 

[vicjagger]

It's getting worse. Check this out:

http://coldhardfootballfacts.com/Ar...rld's_Biggest_D-Bag_(he's_a_Cowboys_fan).html


Meet the World's Biggest D-Bag (he's a Cowboys fan)
Cold, Hard Football Facts for December 4, 2007


We got hammered by Dallas fans all last week for picking Green Bay to edge out the Cowboys in their big Thursday night showdown (as opposed to our typical training regimen of getting hammered all week by drinking vanilla extract and lighter fluid).

Hey, we had good, solid statistical reasons for picking Green Bay. Little did we know the Good Brett of 2007 was going to revert into the Old Yeller Brett of 2005, and then go down with an injury, putting Green Bay’s hopes in the hands of a quarterback (Aaron Rodgers) who had never thrown a meaningful snap in his career.

Football's a very simple game: throw picks against good teams and lose. Favre threw a couple picks, and made a number of awful throws, early in the game that put his team in a deep hole that Rodgers could not overcome (even as he outscored Romo's Cowboys 17-10 once he entered the game).

Bottom line though: we were wrong. We never hide from our mistakes and can take it like men.

And we expected all those Cowboys fans ripping us before the game to pile on gleefully after the game.

We didn’t expect to hear from the World’s Biggest ****** Bag. But we did. His name is Kenan Rappuchi. He works for someplace called Ventures Connect, which apparently is in the business of hiring losers who have no grip on reality and who take themselves and their teams a little too seriously.

Here’s the meat of what he emailed to us Friday:

“You guys are ****ing clueless, and your ‘facts’ just don't add up. Didn't I already tell you that the fact is Dallas would win? You are ****ing stupid. Kill the site, and then kill yourselves.”

Wow, one game wrong and this d-bag is so pissed that he wants us to “kill” ourselves. Talk about overreacting. You’d think we punctured his Tony Romo blow-up doll or short-circuited his Terrell Owens vibrator.

Apparently a 10-point win at home after watching your team get ripped all day by Aaron Rodgers was so exhilarating that the WBDB wants all those who found reason to doubt his Cowboys to die.

We’re sure this ****** creamed his panties all the times we picked the Cowboys to win this year. And, funny, we didn’t hear from him after we picked the Patriots to beat the Cowboys in Dallas earlier this year.

Some guys man up when they’re wrong. That’s our strategy.

And then there are effeminate ****** bags like Kenan who go into juvenile hissy fit if you pick the wrong team to win ... as if we're like the first site in the history of the seedy underworld of online pigskin "punditry " to get a game wrong.

More from Cowboys fans
If you’re interested, here are some of the things we heard last week from some of the more reasonable (in most cases) Cowboys fans.

“You might want to update your Power Rankings. It hard to take your site as serious or objective when ramble about how great the Steelers/Packers are and badmouth Dallas. Your boyfriend Favre is 0-8 in Dallas. The Steelers & Cowboys both played the Jets recently. The cold hard facts are ‘youse guys’ are spouting your opinions & trying to find data to back it up.” – Kevin Stokes

CHFF responds: Apparently, this ******* missed the fact that we had Dallas ranked No. 3 and Pittsburgh No. 5 in our Power Rankings and specifically mentioned Dallas’s 34-3 win over the Jets.

“Dallas WILL beat the Packers on Thursday night and have home field advantage throughout. Dallas IS the best team in the NFC. I know people love to hate, that's ok, we Cowboy fans are used to the jealousy. P.S. The 'Boys will beat the Patsies in Super Bowl 42!” – Brian Page

CHFF responds: Here’s a guy firmly rooted in reality. Hey, he was right about Dallas winning on Thursday night. We were wrong. But then he confuses our slavish devotion to our proven Quality Stats as “jealousy” about a team that surrenders 20.7 PPG yet will somehow beat a team in the Super Bowl that ripped them for 48 points in Dallas earlier this year.

THIS ARTICLE IS CRAP -- ARE YOU A GB FAN ?? HOW COME YOU THINK BEATING A TEAM TWICE ( WHO IS A DIV GAME ) NY IS NOT AS GOOD AS GB BEATING THEM AT HOME . NY , DET ARE QUALITY GAMES -PLEASE - HOW COME THE BEARS GAME ( WHO BEAT A BRONCO TEAM ON THE RISE ) IS NOT A QUALITY LOST AND A QUALITY WIN FOR THE COWBOYS ?? DET -A QUALITY WIN PLEASE -GB ESCAPED FROM THAT GAME AFTER LETTING THEM COME BACK . HOW COME BEATING Commanders ( WINNING RECORD -WHEN WE DID ) IS NOT ONE - WHO HAS GB BEAT ???? NOBODY EITHER ! IF IT READS LIKE CRAP , SOUNDS LIKE CRAP , IT IS CRAP !!!!! – Larry Aratan

CHFF responds: Wow, good thing he wrote in all-caps or we might not have heard him or been able to decipher his illiterate rant. The beauty of this email is that he accuses us of being Packers fans. But his e-mail address is dcwbyf@xxx.com: that’s right, it’s short for “DallasCowboyFan@xxx.com.” Meet Larry, King of the Donkeys.

Cold Hard Fact: Dallas wins, LOL. You look at GB's schedule and then comment on Dallas's weak one? You're a joke.” – Todd Smith

CHFF responds: You know what’s a joke? Being outscored 17-10 in 40 minutes of football playing against a team led Aaron Rodgers, who shredded your defense for 201 passing yards, and then gloating about it.

“I don’t agree with your article - How about the fact that the Cowboys destroyed the Bears 34-10 in Chicago and the Bears beat Green Bay!! You can't compare the Pats to the Giants, Chargers or Lions: 3-0 vs 2-1 when your loss is to the Pats is like being 3-0.” – Frank Badalamenti

CHFF responds: In other words, the Cowboys are unbeatable if we ignore the game in which they got smoked at home.

And one reasonable Packers fan who realizes we always man up:
“It's nice that you've pointed out your blunder regarding how you picked the Packers to go this year. I enjoy your site and comments. However, I feel its time that you officially apologize for insulting Brett Favre, the Green Bay Packers and especially the fans for standing by our team. That’s what we do. Appreciate your consideration.” – James Durocher

CHFF responds: James, we did apologize to the Packers and Favre earlier this season. Of course, just as soon as we bought into the new Brett he goes out and plays like the 2005 Brett in their biggest game of the year. Must be our blind Green Bay homerism that Cowboys fans were so upset with.

 

[mr.jameswoods]

I'm not saying we should not have done better aginst him but I don't think Dallas knew what to expect out of him considering there is little to no info on him because he does not play!!! Yes he is an NFL QB sitting behind a top QB and only sees time on the practice team so how would Dallas coaches be able to know the strenght and weakness of Rodgers. In the end Rodgers played very well but he did not play well enough to beat us so yes Dallas did take care of him in the end.

Great post, my compliments! The Arizona Cardinals were confusing teams when they were substituing Warner and Leinart in the same game because teams were only prepared to face Leinart. That's how they beat the Steelers.

Likewise, how can a coaching staff prepare for Rodgers considering he never plays. I'm sure our coaching staff was as suprised as it's fans to realize how fast he was considering he is 6'2 and 210 lbs. Even in college, Rodgers never demonstrated he was mobile and can run. If anyone says they knew that about Rodgers, they are lying just for the sake of argument.

Also, I was impressed by how well prepared Rodgers was. He knew their offense really well. Sure, you can say a backup who has been in the system should know the offense but that's easier said than done. A lot of backups implode on their first start regardless of how long they have been in the system. It's up to the backups how well they prepare themselves and many simply don't study enough. Rodgers has been working hard to prepare. That was evident.

 

[Rack]

His name is Kenan Rappuchi. He works for someplace called Ventures Connect, which apparently is in the business of hiring losers who have no grip on reality and who take themselves and their teams a little too seriously.

I smell a lawsuit coming.

 

[AdamJT13]

The latest apologists for the Green Bay cause is a curious website called coldhardfootballfacts.com.

That's nothing more than a Patriots fans' Web site that uses flawed "statistics" to "prove" certain things -- mostly how good the Patriots are.

 

[arglebargle]

Rogers had not played at all this season. His time from previous years had not been that impressive. I am pretty sure the Cowboys defense dropped into a 'softer' pattern, to not give up the big play, and to take advantage of Rogers' mistakes. Also, I am pretty sure that the GB offensive gameplan changed when Favre went down.

Rogers didn't make those mistakes, and appears to have learned a thing or two in the last couple of seasons. Of course, some will say he's still a gump, and the Cowboys' defense was 'shredded' instead. However I think it was Ware who said that with Favre they were rushing to a point, but with Rogers they had to maintain lane integrity, and he made them pay several times when they didn't.

 

[zeromaster]

We will agree to disagree on this one.

He is STILL a NFL QB and we are STILL an NFL team. He had too much success in there against our defense.

That's what a lot of teams were saying about Romo last year, even though he'd sat for a couple of years. Yet several of them lost anyway.

And New England is probably beating themselves up about starting QBs on bad teams that have come within 3 points of them each of the last 2 weeks.

Ah the pursuit of perfection: it brings no happiness.