Interesting Sportscenter statistic wrt Preseason

[kmd24]

Of the last 45 teams who finished the preseason undefeated, 28 have made the playoffs.

OTOH, of the last 40 teams that have gone winless in preseason, only 5 have made the playoffs.

I guess preseason means something after all.

 

[DallasInDC]

That doesn't bode well for the skins. Of course the difference with them is that they strategically sandbagged the preseason only to catch the rest of the league off gaurd with the other 98% of their playbook and their high power offense.


What these stats do not take into account, is the performance of the 1st team in the preseason games. Of those 40 teams that did not win a game, how much of those losses occured as a result of the back ups, i.e. starters played well and built a lead and only to be thrown away due to the poor performance by scrubs. If you take that into consideration, I am sure that most of those 5 playoff teams probably fell into that category.

Even with that said, I still don't think preseason wins/loss means anything

 

[jazzcat22]

We weren't exactly undefeated, I'm afraid that tie is a bad omen...

j/k...but it does look as if it means something, even as small as it may be.

 

[wileedog]

What these stats do not take into account, is the performance of the 1st team in the preseason games. Of those 40 teams that did not win a game, how much of those losses occured as a result of the back ups, i.e. starters played well and built a lead and only to be thrown away due to the poor performance by scrubs. If you take that into consideration, I am sure that most of those 5 playoff teams probably fell into that category.

Yes and no. If your 2nd team goes in and gets consistently thumped, it probably means your team is way behind in the depth department. Injuries are a huge part of the equation, and if a couple of starters go down those guys who were getting beat by 2nd teamers in pre-season are now facing first teamers in real games.

Even with that said, I still don't think preseason wins/loss means anything

Agreed, but all things considered I feel better about the Cowboys having the pre-season they did than I would if I were a Skins fan with the pre-season they had.

2% playbook and all.

 

[clayman]

Didn't Pitt go winless last year? and we know the Colts are notorious for that then get 12+ wins yearly....doesn't mean much more than glorified full speed practices to shore out a roster unless you're a new head coach or totally switching schemes (ground and pound to WCO).....Saunders and Gibbs are both from the Coryell tree so I wouldn't put as much emphasis on these games as a new scheme totally....but they did stink.

 

[DallasInDC]

Yes and no. If your 2nd team goes in and gets consistently thumped, it probably means your team is way behind in the depth department. Injuries are a huge part of the equation, and if a couple of starters go down those guys who were getting beat by 2nd teamers in pre-season are now facing first teamers in real games.

Valid point. However, with the injuries, you are not replacing your starter with the entire 2nd team.

I do realize that depth is much more than subbing for injuries and your 2nd team players play a vital role throughout the season with rotations. I think this is what the skins fans don't realize. they act as if only the 11 starters on offense and defense play the whole game and that their depth is only relegated to coming in for injured players. That may be true with the QB, OL and DB positions but the rest of the positions usually rotate players in and out based on game situations and you need to have good depth to do that.

 

[flashback]

We weren't exactly undefeated, I'm afraid that tie is a bad omen...

j/k...but it does look as if it means something, even as small as it may be.

Actually, we did exactly go undefeated. We weren't 4-1, we were 3-0-1. That 0 is how many times we were defeated.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Ever since I was like 10 years old the adage towards preseason was alway "it doesn't really matter unless you go undefeated or if you don't win one game."



YAKUZA

 

[kmd24]

Didn't Pitt go winless last year? and we know the Colts are notorious for that then get 12+ wins yearly....doesn't mean much more than glorified full speed practices to shore out a roster unless you're a new head coach or totally switching schemes (ground and pound to WCO).....Saunders and Gibbs are both from the Coryell tree so I wouldn't put as much emphasis on these games as a new scheme totally....but they did stink.

Indy is "notorious" for a lack of depth at QB. Once Manning leaves the game, they are not the same team, and I think you'd see the same result in the regular season.

If you look at the Indy 1st team results this preseason, they are very good. I think they scored TD's on their first possession in each preseason game. This is despite their 1-3 preseason record.

Besides the Commanders, the other winless team in the 2006 preseason is Pittsburgh. However, the starters only played one series in each of the first two games, scoring on both drives. The third game the starters only played two series, and the score was 3-0, Eagles when they left the game.

Oh, and Pittsburgh ws 3-1 in the 2005 preseason.

 

[superpunk]

Of the last 45 teams who finished the preseason undefeated, 28 have made the playoffs.

OTOH, of the last 40 teams that have gone winless in preseason, only 5 have made the playoffs.

I guess preseason means something after all.

I had brought that up in another place, and of course received the stock, Gibbs history, the mythical Saunders history that everyone seems to spout off without ever looking it up.

So I did some research. Feel free to add to it, or just enjoy. The myth is that Saunders has been 0-10 over his last couple preseason, and his offenses have performed badly, on account of playing it so close to the vest.

The truth?

Their record was 1-7, over the past two years. I didn't go back further (is there any need to?).

In those games, they led at halftime (traditionally when the scrubs start taking over) in all but 2 games (CLE and MIN).

They averaged 340 yards of total offense per game.

Green was 51/76 (67%) for 611 yards (8.04 ypa), 4 TDs, and 1 INT.

Johnson and Holmes combined stats - 75 atttempts for 423 yards (5.6 ypc) and 3 TDs.

It looks to me like their first team offense was pretty good, even though they were losing the games (W-L records in preseason are nice, but with no other background....)

Conversely, the Commanders this year averaged 258 yards of offense per game. Brunell's stats are hard to find, but I know they're not good. The differences between performances are pretty marked.

 

[kmd24]

Brunell's stats are hard to find, but I know they're not good. The differences between performances are pretty marked.

You can find Brunell's 45.7% completion rate and 49.0 passer rating here:

http://www.nfl.com/teams/stats/WAS/2006/pre

Or for the lazy among us, he was 16/35 (45.7%) for 174 yards (5.0 ypa) 0 TD's 1 INT and sacked 4 times for 41 yards.

 

[superpunk]

You can find Brunell's 45.7% completion rate and 49.0 passer rating here:

http://www.nfl.com/teams/stats/WAS/2006/pre

Or for the lazy among us, he was 16/35 (45.7%) for 174 yards (5.0 ypa) 0 TD's 1 INT and sacked 4 times for 41 yards.

Gracias.

I realize Portis was hurt. But they never lead at the half. They were outgained in half the games, badly - and only outgained the Ravens and Jets by a combined 30 yards.