Strength of Schedule Fallacy

[Diehardblues]

If you just look at the games Dallas has won, those opponents are 37-67-3.

Yep. Teams like Bengals and Packers collapsed this year and AFC North down. The Bears and Browns are 2-21 of that record.

Most of all our toughest stretch is upcoming with 4 potential playoff teams with winning records.

Minn, NYG, Tampa, & Det all fighting for playoffs.

If we win the next 2 it's over but that's still a big if. One week at a time.

 

[TheCount]

I think it's okay to admit that our schedule hasn't been packed with powerhouses.

The mistake is assuming that it somehow lessens our success. Go look at New England's record and the notoriously uncompetitive division they play in, no one every calls them out because they've also won Superbowls.

All you can do is beat the teams that are put in front of you, and if you do that enough, no one cares about your schedule.

 

[erod]

Meh. Then you are just discounting what Dallas is doing. Maybe, just maybe, our team is better than you give them credit for.

2 years ago we were 12-4 and on our way to 1 of the top 2-3 teams in the league. This year we are better than 2014 in my opinion.

So this idea that everyone is bad - I do not but it.

Everybody sucks. I watch all the games. The CBA has destroyed this league. Nobody practices hardly at all. Tackling it terrible. Quarterbacking is embarrassing overall.

New England, Dallas, Oakland, maybe Atlanta........and who?

 

[windjc]

But isn't the SOS argument that you are calling a fallacy based on who Dallas has played, not who they will play?

No. We have already played 4 games against opponents currently in the playoffs. We have 2 more of those games to play.

Yes, our remaining SOS schedule is higher than our one up to date, but our 9 win differential + 1-22 record of SF and Cleveland completely skew our results.

We have:
beaten Washington twice - Washington has only lost 2 other games
beaten Ravens
beaten Pittsburgh in Pittsburgh
beaten GB in GB
beaten Bengals - leading 28-0 at one point.

We have not had a cake walk.

 

[windjc]

Everybody sucks. I watch all the games. The CBA has destroyed this league. Nobody practices hardly at all. Tackling it terrible. Quarterbacking is embarrassing overall.

New England, Dallas, Oakland, maybe Atlanta........and who?

We aren't in the 90s anymore. You can say this about any team in the last 20 years. Get over it.

You live too much in the past. If the NFL is crap, then its been crap for a while and will continue to be crap. (I dont agree with your assessment btw). So Dallas' goal is to win in the crappy league they play in.

 

[Sydla]

No. We have already played 4 games against opponents currently in the playoffs. We have 2 more of those games to play.

Yes, our remaining SOS schedule is higher than our one up to date, but our 9 win differential + 1-22 record of SF and Cleveland completely skew our results.

We have:
beaten Washington twice - Washington has only lost 2 other games
beaten Ravens
beaten Pittsburgh in Pittsburgh
beaten GB in GB
beaten Bengals - leading 28-0 at one point.

We have not had a cake walk.

Cake walk might be a bit extreme but we've played a fairly below average schedule.

It is what it is. If you look at some of the advanced metrics measures, our SOS is pretty weak. Football Outsiders has our current schedule played 20th in their analysis.

 

[Diehardblues]

Everybody sucks. I watch all the games. The CBA has destroyed this league. Nobody practices hardly at all. Tackling it terrible. Quarterbacking is embarrassing overall.

New England, Dallas, Oakland, maybe Atlanta........and who?

This is worse I've seen NFL in years. Maybe lowest point.

 

[Diehardblues]

Cake walk might be a bit extreme but we've played a fairly below average schedule.

It is what it is. If you look at some of the advanced metrics measures, our SOS is pretty weak. Football Outsiders has our current schedule played 20th in their analysis.

That's fixing to change with no losing record teams left. We could still lose #1 seed and division to Ny .

 

[Sydla]

That's fixing to change with no losing record teams left. We could still lose #1 seed and division to Ny .

Yep. According to FO, their remaining schedule is Top 10.

 

[windjc]

That's fixing to change with no losing record teams left. We could still lose #1 seed and division to Ny .

Really?

So you predict the Giants to win in Pittsburgh, against us again, in Washington and against the Eagles and Lions? Hell, if they win out they deserve it more than us.

 

[Diehardblues]

Really?

So you predict the Giants to win in Pittsburgh, against us again, in Washington and against the Eagles and Lions? Hell, if they win out they deserve it more than us.

Not predicting just saying it's a possibility .

We need to win next two games to lock it up or we open the door.

 

[Hawkeye19]

If we have played a weak schedule-- then so has every team in the NFCE because we have 14 out of 16 common opponents. Seattle's record must also be weak b/c they play in the NFCW-- and NE needs to have their 9-2 record checked as they play in the weak AFCE (sarcasm).

~sigh~

You can only play who they schedule you to play. When in doubt-- use they eyeball test. Dallas has been the most consistent, dominant offense in the NFL this year. Period. Does that mean we're a lock for a Super Bowl berth? No. But I think what we've done has put us in the driver's seat in the NFC and we have no reason to feel guilty about it lol...

 

[ghst187]

No one has ever mentioned SOS when talking about the 1980s 49ers or the Patriots playing in the worst divisions in football every year then riding a gaudy record and home field advantage into their Super Bowls.
I do know one thing and that's if the '94 NFC championship game had been in Dallas vice San Fran we would've won 4 in a row.

 

[hairic]

Easy schedule applied to the first 8 games; it's been balancing itself ever since.

 

[jrumann59]

Strength of schedule means diddly once the games are played. Look at the Commanders, they finished first in the Division last year, how good are the Cards and Panthers which are the only two differences in opponents

 

[landroverking]

One Fuzzy Math
Two no one knew the NFC East would be this good.
Dallas had. Fourth finish schedule from 2015.

 

[Kevinicus]

No. We have already played 4 games against opponents currently in the playoffs. We have 2 more of those games to play.

Yes, our remaining SOS schedule is higher than our one up to date, but our 9 win differential + 1-22 record of SF and Cleveland completely skew our results.

We have:
beaten Washington twice - Washington has only lost 2 other games
beaten Ravens
beaten Pittsburgh in Pittsburgh
beaten GB in GB
beaten Bengals - leading 28-0 at one point.

We have not had a cake walk.

Tell me again how that's not based on who we HAVE played?

And I'm confused on a few of those...do you think beating GB or Cincy is impressive considering the teams they have shown to be? Most of the league is hovering around .500. It changes every week on whether or not teams we have a winning record or a losing record. And still...the argument, whether you disagree with it or not, is entirely based on the teams they have played.

 

[Echo9]

Cowboys will roll the Bucs

Seattle thought the same. No easy games the rest of the way.

 

[dwmyers]

I don't think your numbers are correct, unless you're counting the remaining games too.

But yeah it's simple. The SOS criticism to date is dumb.

Of course Dallas has a weaker schedule-- they've dished out 10 losses for their opponents.

That means their opponents are going to appear weaker AND their opponents are going to have a huge boost in their SOS with Dallas on the ledger.

Meaning any league ranking of SOS is going to be heavily skewed because Dallas is good.

You can statistically show this is a real effect (weaker teams tend to have better SOS rankings). Chad Stuart, if I recall correctly, did it on his blog. That said, it is also statistically provable that strength of schedule is a significant factor in playoff wins, so those teams who actually played a tougher schedule (so far, Atlanta) tend to win more games than those who played a weaker schedule.

I have a formula I've used for some time, which relates the logit of the win probability to this formula: 0.668 + 0.348(SRS calculated strength of schedule) + 0.434(Playoff experience). I should be publishing new formulas soon, with data for playoff experience within the year, within two years, and within three years. The scalar term, which is not obvious, is playoff HFA.

I wish I had bet it in the Denver-Carolina Super Bowl. I'd have been much richer if I did.

D-

 

[windjc]

Tell me again how that's not based on who we HAVE played?

And I'm confused on a few of those...do you think beating GB or Cincy is impressive considering the teams they have shown to be? Most of the league is hovering around .500. It changes every week on whether or not teams we have a winning record or a losing record. And still...the argument, whether you disagree with it or not, is entirely based on the teams they have played.

Do I think beating GB in GB was a good win? Absolutely. How did the Giants do there? They got rolled. Cincinnati has yet to get a pounding like we gave them. The Giants beat them by a point. So yeah, I think out +103 point differential says a lot. And again, based on WHO WE HAVE PLAYED, take away Cleveland and San Francisco and our Wins and Losses and the record TODAY of these teams against the rest of the league is 42-32-2. So 8-1 against 42-32-2 I think is pretty darn GOOD.