The Cowboys are the only team in the NFL who has not achieved this goal

[ScipioCowboy]

Honestly man, it just is that I see 11 points as very arbitrary. That is my point. Is is very hard to score 11 points in the NFL. So why wasn't 10 points used? Why not 12 points? Infinitely easier to score 12 than 11. 10 would signify double digit scoring and it is also common. I would have had no issues at all if the parameter had said 2 TDs in the first half. That is alarming and I admit I had no idea we hadn't. Nor would I have likely chimed in if it was double digit scoring, or 10 points. Unless of course it was to show that we had scored 10 four times.

I also brought up the fact that it is possible to score 11 or more and still be behind.

My only point is that 11 points is a manufactured, cherry picked number that does not signify a large increase in chances of winning. Would you feel better if in one of our games we scored 4 FGs in the first half? I wouldn't, because to me that still means we are stalling drives and settling for FGs. Yet it would be above that 11 point barrier. So by the original premise this would mean we are doing something right like the rest of the league supposedly.

I don't see it that way at all. Therefore I don't see 11 points as an incredible leap over 10 points which we have done 4 times as I originally noted when I misread the OP. In other words 11 points is not a huge advantage over 10 points as it seemed to be presented.

Again, I appreciate the work you did. It was interesting and I thank you. I just do not see this as alarming. The not scoring 2 TDs...oh hell yeah. That sucks.

Let's say I'm running a marathon. Along the marathon path, there are five markers spaced at equal distances so I can keep track of my progress. Each marker includes a time stamp so I know how long it took me to get there.

While there are five markers in this marathon, there could just as easily be seven or eight or ten or a hundred markers. It doesn't matter. What's important is that all runners in the marathon are using the same markers; therefore, I have a means of comparing my progress against the other runners.

By looking at the average time it requires to reach each marker, I can know if I'm running ahead or behind most other runners.

This 10 point number is like one of those markers. It gives us a means of comparing the Cowboys against the other teams in the league. And it's an area we need to improve. That's all.

 

[goshan]

The average points in the 1st half (6.6?) is the statistically relevant data point. The fact that we are the only team who hasn't reached 10 is primarily a way to amplify/communicate our poor performance on Offense in the 1st half.

 

[TheDude]

10 points provides a 65% correlation, but 6.6 pts is far, far lower and show a systemic, non-arbitrary problem. If McLovin did a bell curve for the league 6.6 would be in the tail with power houses like Cleveland and Jacksonville. That is standards of deviation away from average, good or our potential as evidenced by second half performance.

People can stick their head in the sand and argue the virtues of 10 vs. 11 vs. 14; but 6.6 is awful. It shows a team that is outmanned, ill-prepared or stubborn.

In any case, it does not fit with a defense that has invested in rushing the passer and coverage at the expense of employing run stuffers.

I think everyone agrees 6.6 is pathetic.

The 65% in and of itself is fairly meaningless because, as shinywalrus said, the more points you score the more you should win. Using the regression formula the 6.6pts in the first half actually projects to only 3 Dallas wins. The fact that dallas has 5 wins can partly be attributed to the high 3rd highest scoring in the second half.

You made me relook at the data.The Standard deviation after 11 games the average team H1 scoring totals 125pts with a standard deviation of +/-35pts

This equates to 66% of teams score between 14.6 and 8.2pts in the first half

Caveat: There is skew and not a good bell/gaussian distribution and normal standard deviation extrapolations can increase error from mean.

 

[jnday]

This is part of the original post in this thread, .. some need to read it and see that it was not that complicated.

It was never about 11 points, never about whether you were ahead or behind, or what the odds of winning the game were.

It was simply, .. we are the only team in the NFL who has yet to score more than 10 pts before the half.

And I'm not putting words in the OP mouth, but I think he was only saying that this was not a good thing.

This explains the whole post. Anyway you look at it, the Cowboys not scoring more than 11 points in any first half this year speaks volumes about the coaches and players.

 

[CowboysFanSince88]

This explains the whole post. Anyway you look at it, the Cowboys not scoring more than 11 points in any first half this year speaks volumes about the coaches and players.

Especially when you have the other option of being in FG range 4 times in 30 mins and can atleast get 12 pts or maybe even 15 pts

I just want the offense to pretend they are down 20 when the game starts:laugh1:

 

[peplaw06]

I wonder if there is another team in the league that hasn't reached 13 points in the first half?

I kind of doubt that there's a team out there that has only scored 11 or 12 points in the first half once. 11 points is damn near impossible to score, and 12 would require 4 FGs in 30 minutes, also rare.

13 would be a TD and 2 FGs, so that could be more plausible. I don't have the time to look it up now, but I suspect that we're the only team that hasn't scored 13 or more points in the first half this season.

 

[TheDude]

I wonder if there is another team in the league that hasn't reached 13 points in the first half?

I kind of doubt that there's a team out there that has only scored 11 or 12 points in the first half once. 11 points is damn near impossible to score, and 12 would require 4 FGs in 30 minutes, also rare.

13 would be a TD and 2 FGs, so that could be more plausible. I don't have the time to look it up now, but I suspect that we're the only team that hasn't scored 13 or more points in the first half this season.

NOPE. Standing alone

 

[Hostile]

I wonder if there is another team in the league that hasn't reached 13 points in the first half?

I kind of doubt that there's a team out there that has only scored 11 or 12 points in the first half once. 11 points is damn near impossible to score, and 12 would require 4 FGs in 30 minutes, also rare.

13 would be a TD and 2 FGs, so that could be more plausible. I don't have the time to look it up now, but I suspect that we're the only team that hasn't scored 13 or more points in the first half this season.

NOPE. Standing alone

Now, see I find this alarming and not arbitrary.

 

[TheDude]

Dont really know why it is so small, but this is the relationship between first half points and point differential and W/L/T

I found the data game by game, this seems better as averages can mask an anomaly (e.g. NE going up by 35 in 1st half can skew there overall results)


You can see in upper left that scoring <=10pts in a half has a 34% winning. Go over 10 (usually starting at 13+) and that % jumps doubles to 69%

The total points while important ís still seemingly notstrong as margin. Go up by more than 1Td and teams have won 88% of those games

When trailing at halftime(Margin<0) there is only a 25% chance of winning. Tied is 50/50 (13/13). Only 40 games have been come from behind at halftime. That is surprising, but human nature will remember those games since they are likley more exciting.

Final chart to the right shows all team and the point differential in all of the wins. Only 4 teams have - point differntials (Jax, Dal, KC, Cle).

 

[OklahomaCowboy88]

Hopefully our next head coach better have an offensive background.

 

[peplaw06]

Now, see I find this alarming and not arbitrary.

See, wouldn't it have been great if you had looked into it further before going on a tirade about 11 points??