What We Have Done - What We Have to Do

[rcaldw]

Teams We Have Defeated:

Tampa Bay - 1-9
Carolina - 4-6
Kansas City - 3-7
Atlanta 5-5
Seattle - 3-7
Philadelphia - 6-4
Washington - 3-7
Oakland - 3-8

Total: 28-53

Teams We Have Lost To:
New York Giants - 6-5
Denver - 7-4
Green Bay - 7-4

Total: 20-13

Record vs. Teams with .500 or better: 2-3
Record vs. Teams below .500: 6-0

Record Left:
@ New York Giants - 6-5
San Diego - 7-3
@ New Orleans - 10-0
@ Washington - 3-7
Philadelphia - 6-4

Total: 32-19

We have feasted on below .500 teams. We have struggled with .500 or better. (2-3)

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out.

I predict we win 2 and lose 3 down the stretch and finish 10-6. Not a bad finish at all, and will qualify for the playoffs.

 

[Biggems]

Teams We Have Defeated:

Tampa Bay - 1-9
Carolina - 4-6
Kansas City - 3-7
Atlanta 5-5
Seattle - 3-7
Philadelphia - 6-4
Washington - 3-7
Oakland - 3-8

Total: 28-53

Teams We Have Lost To:
New York Giants - 6-5
Denver - 7-4
Green Bay - 7-4

Total: 20-13

Record vs. Teams with .500 or better: 2-3
Record vs. Teams below .500: 6-0

Record Left:
@ New York Giants - 6-5
San Diego - 7-3
@ New Orleans - 10-0
@ Washington - 3-7
Philadelphia - 6-4

Total: 32-19

We have feasted on below .500 teams. We have struggled with .500 or better. (2-3)

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out.

I predict we win 2 and lose 3 down the stretch and finish 10-6. Not a bad finish at all, and will qualify for the playoffs.

We didnt struggle against the Giants, we were just careless with the pigskin. Also we didnt feast on the Panthers, Chiefs, or Skins. All of those games were a struggle.

 

[rcaldw]

We didnt struggle against the Giants, we were just careless with the pigskin. Also we didnt feast on the Panthers, Chiefs, or Skins. All of those games were a struggle.

Wasn't referring to individual game performances, was referring to how the wins and losses break down by opponent's records.

 

[AdamJT13]

Teams We Have Defeated:

Tampa Bay - 1-9
Carolina - 4-6
Kansas City - 3-7
Atlanta 5-5
Seattle - 3-7
Philadelphia - 6-4
Washington - 3-7
Oakland - 3-8

Total: 28-53

Teams We Have Lost To:
New York Giants - 6-5
Denver - 7-4
Green Bay - 7-4

Total: 20-13

Record vs. Teams with .500 or better: 2-3
Record vs. Teams below .500: 6-0

This is a self-fulfilling statistic. The Panthers and Falcons would be .500 or better if we had lost to them, and the Giants would be sub-.500 if we had beaten them.

 

[dadymat]

Teams We Have Defeated:

Tampa Bay - 1-9
Carolina - 4-6
Kansas City - 3-7
Atlanta 5-5
Seattle - 3-7
Philadelphia - 6-4
Washington - 3-7
Oakland - 3-8

Total: 28-53

Teams We Have Lost To:
New York Giants - 6-5
Denver - 7-4
Green Bay - 7-4

Total: 20-13

Record vs. Teams with .500 or better: 2-3
Record vs. Teams below .500: 6-0

Record Left:
@ New York Giants - 6-5
San Diego - 7-3
@ New Orleans - 10-0
@ Washington - 3-7
Philadelphia - 6-4

Total: 32-19

We have feasted on below .500 teams. We have struggled with .500 or better. (2-3)

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out.

I predict we win 2 and lose 3 down the stretch and finish 10-6. Not a bad finish at all, and will qualify for the playoffs.

as long as we are talking win loss records.....our record is better than all but one of those teams you listed and we all play in the same watered down league.....im sure we could disect their schedules and find the same type wins and losses....we match up very well with all those teams...even the Saints

 

[rcaldw]

I'm actually encouraged by what I see on the breakdown. To me, when you are having a great season you are beating the teams you SHOULD beat. EVERYONE has more of a battle on their hands against the best teams of the league.

So, the post is not meant to be a negative, it is simply a breakdown of where we have been, and where we are headed.

I do think it is telling however, that you can simply post facts (and those are facts ) and you immediately have some combative responses.

I know football is an entirely different sport, but I compare a breakdown like this one to basketball and baseball.

Just take basketball for instance. If you consistently beat the Knicks, and Oklahoma's of the world, then you will have a great record even if you split with the Lakers and Spurs of the world.

So, again, I think the fact we have beaten EVERYONE who falls below .500 speaks of a very good year and hope for the playoffs.

 

[rcaldw]

This is a self-fulfilling statistic. The Panthers and Falcons would be .500 or better if we had lost to them, and the Giants would be sub-.500 if we had beaten them.

You are right, Adam, that stats like these are always somewhat self-fulfilling, but not entirely because 4 other teams had to beat those 5-5 teams also.

But I get what you are saying.

 

[rcaldw]

To follow up on Dadymat's point:

The Giants only have 2 wins against .500 or better opponents (Atlanta and Dallas) (2-5)

San Diego has 4 wins against .500 or better opponents (Miami, Giants, Eagles, Broncos)(4-3)

New Orleans has 4 (Eagles, Giants, Miami, Atlanta) (4-0)

The Eagles have only 1 (Giants) (1-3 against those teams)

The Giants and Chargers have played the most teams above .500. All the NFC East teams are below .500 against those teams .500 or better.

 

[CATCH17]

We can beat anybody.

 

[AdamJT13]

You are right, Adam, that stats like these are always somewhat self-fulfilling, but not entirely because 4 other teams had to beat those 5-5 teams also.

They're always self-fulfilling. If you play a division team that goes 8-6, 7-7 or 6-8 against the rest of the league for the season, or if you play a non-division team that goes 8-7 or 7-8 against the rest of the league, whether they fall into a "losing team," "winning team" or ".500 team" for the season depends ENTIRELY on how many times you beat them. If you beat them, they're going to be classified worse than if you lose to them. So basing it on their record including those games automatically makes your record against "winning" teams look worse and your record against "losing" teams look better.

The only way to remove that flaw is to consider the opponents' records NOT INCLUDING the games against us.

Here are those records --

Tampa Bay - 1-8
Carolina - 4-5
Kansas City - 3-6
Atlanta 5-4
Seattle - 3-6
Philadelphia - 6-3
Washington - 3-6
Oakland - 3-7
New York Giants - 5-5
Denver - 6-4
Green Bay - 6-4

 

[rcaldw]

They're always self-fulfilling. If you play a division team that goes 8-6, 7-7 or 6-8 against the rest of the league for the season, or if you play a non-division team that goes 8-7 or 7-8 against the rest of the league, whether they fall into a "losing team," "winning team" or ".500 team" for the season depends ENTIRELY on how many times you beat them. If you beat them, they're going to be classified worse than if you lose to them. So basing it on their record including those games automatically makes your record against "winning" teams look worse and your record against "losing" teams look better.

The only way to remove that flaw is to consider the opponents' records NOT INCLUDING the games against us.

Here are those records --

Tampa Bay - 1-8
Carolina - 4-5
Kansas City - 3-6
Atlanta 5-4
Seattle - 3-6
Philadelphia - 6-3
Washington - 3-6
Oakland - 3-7
New York Giants - 5-5
Denver - 6-4
Green Bay - 6-4

But that doesn't change what I posted one bit does it? Because I went record against .500 or better, and it is still 2-3 by these numbers, and 6-0 against below .500

 

[rcaldw]

They're always self-fulfilling. If you play a division team that goes 8-6, 7-7 or 6-8 against the rest of the league for the season, or if you play a non-division team that goes 8-7 or 7-8 against the rest of the league, whether they fall into a "losing team," "winning team" or ".500 team" for the season depends ENTIRELY on how many times you beat them. If you beat them, they're going to be classified worse than if you lose to them. So basing it on their record including those games automatically makes your record against "winning" teams look worse and your record against "losing" teams look better.

The only way to remove that flaw is to consider the opponents' records NOT INCLUDING the games against us.

Here are those records --

Tampa Bay - 1-8 Win (1-0 against below .500)
Carolina - 4-5 Win (2-0 against below .500)
Kansas City - 3-6 Win (3-0 against below .500)
Atlanta 5-4 Win (1-0 against .500 or better)
Seattle - 3-6 Win (4-0 against below .500)
Philadelphia - 6-3 Win (2-0 against .500 or better)
Washington - 3-6 Win (5-0 against below .500)
Oakland - 3-7 Win (6-0 against below .500)
New York Giants - 5-5 Loss (2-1 against .500 or better)
Denver - 6-4 Loss (2-2 against .500 or better)
Green Bay - 6-4 Loss (2-3 against .500 or better)

I plugged the numbers in. They are the same as the original observation.

 

[Chuck 54]

Outside of Minny and NO, is there any other team in the NFC that isn't in the exact same situation?

We don't have 2-3 teams in our division that are automatic victories twice a season.

 

[AdamJT13]

But that doesn't change what I posted one bit does it? Because I went record against .500 or better, and it is still 2-3 by these numbers, and 6-0 against below .500

I didn't say it would change anything in this instance, I just pointed out the flaw in your method. The flaw evens out right now, but it's still a flaw.

 

[percyhoward]

But that doesn't change what I posted one bit does it?

No it doesn't. We have to improve against the better teams, and especially against the better defenses.

Division leaders per game scoring average vs. Top 7 Defenses (points per game)
1. Min 33.0
2. SD 27.0
3. NE 26.0
4. Ind 25.5
5. Cin 13.7
6. Az 10.0
7. Dal 8.5

The Saints are the only division leader that has not yet faced a top 7 defense (points per game). But they have 3 of their next 4 games against top 7 defenses.

Bottom line: We have indeeed been easy victims for these top 7 defenses, and that has to change.

 

[rcaldw]

I didn't say it would change anything in this instance, I just pointed out the flaw in your method. The flaw evens out right now, but it's still a flaw.

I understand what you are saying, but the point of this particular breakdown is still valid.

And in terms of the poster right above you, no not everyone is in the same situation. The Chargers and Saints are above .500 against the playoff contenders.

Regardless, we have done what we have needed to do, and we are sitting at a very nice 8-3 heading into the stretch run. I think anyone would have taken that when the season started. It IS a tough stretch run, though, and if we come out of it 2-3, I predict we win the division.

 

[RCowboyFan]

I understand what you are saying, but the point of this particular breakdown is still valid.

And in terms of the poster right above you, no not everyone is in the same situation. The Chargers and Saints are above .500 against the playoff contenders.

Regardless, we have done what we have needed to do, and we are sitting at a very nice 8-3 heading into the stretch run. I think anyone would have taken that when the season started. It IS a tough stretch run, though, and if we come out of it 2-3, I predict we win the division.

If Cowboys do win against Giants and then are able to beat Chargers, only game I see then as a definite loss might be against New Orleans. I see Eagles game to be a tough game at home, especially if Eagles are looking at Elimination game. But I see it hard for them to win that game, since Cowboys will be hell bent not to lose to them.

Unless they have wrapped up the division and seeding is also set, I don't see them losing that game.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

I'm thinking 3-2 down the stretch with the 3 wins coming against our division opponents.

 

[rcaldw]

I'm thinking 3-2 down the stretch with the 3 wins coming against our division opponents.

If we win in New York, then I'm with you 100%. I think beating Washington in Washington will get done, and I think beating the Eagles at home is VERY doable.

 

[jobberone]

I don't get the let's win 2 or 3 of the last five.

Let's win them all. I only see one big challenge for us and that's NO.