Chiefs Brady has lost 5 with the same players Matt had... - Page 8

Red Dawg · 12-09-2009, 03:11 PM

just saying Matt haters need to get real. The team is awful not Matt.

Amnorix · 12-10-2009, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Their schedule is tougher.

2009: Opponents have a .516 winning percentage

2008: Opponents had a .480 winning percentage

Yeah, the old adage of lies, damn lies and statistics is coming into play here.

Colts/Saints screw up the curve.

Tits were 0-6 or whatever when we played them, then they switched QBs and became a real NFL team.

Other htan the Colts/Saints, not a single team that we've played this year has a winning record at the moment. That's a whole bunch of average.

Amnorix · 12-10-2009, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania

Yeah, they've hit a bump in the road... it happens to most teams. I think many expected it to happen to Indy this year as well, but they great Peyton is showing they can win with the likes of Garcon and Collie playing big roles. It's incredible really.

Their defense is much better than it was under Dungy also. They quit all that cover 2 crap.

Mile High Mania · 12-10-2009, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Their defense is much better than it was under Dungy also. They quit all that cover 2 crap.

Sure, but when you see the repeated comebacks that you've seen lately and that freaking win vs Miami when he had the ball for fewer than a quarter... sheesh, that's all Manning.

**Tribal Warfare** · 12-10-2009, 10:35 AM

You got to love some guys are comparing a FHOFer who is Brady to a game manager in Cassel

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-10-2009, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania

Stats are great... the 2009 numbers are skewed a bit by the two 12-0 teams on their schedule. NE has only played 3 teams with a record OVER .500 at this point. Denver has had 6 games comparatively.

I don't give a shit about Denver. They have nothing to do with this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus

I really haven't paid much attention to NE's schedule but there were some on here claiming NE's record this year was worse than last because of their much tougher schedule.

Interesting.

Marcellus · 12-10-2009, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Their schedule is tougher.

2009: Opponents have a .516 winning percentage

2008: Opponents had a .480 winning percentage

You know that "stats" can be deceiving right? Here you go.

2008

NE played KC and Stl which both had 2 wins. That drives the avg down. How many times do you get to play 2 teams with 2 wins from outside your division? That would make for a super easy season but their next lowest win % for an opponent was 7-9.

Worst record in their division was Buffalo at 7-9. Worst team they played besides Buffalo (and the above mentioned KC and Stl) was Denver who finished 8-8. They played 2 horrible teams a 7-9 team 2x (buffalo) and everybody else was .500 or better.

They played Indy, Pitt, and SD as well.

Go look at their schedule and who they actually played and then look at this years and how it's shaping up and tell me its much harder this year.

All 3 division rivals are behind on winning % from last year and may not finish at .500. No doubt Miami is not going 11-5 this year, The Jets likely aren't going 9-7 and Buffalo is not going to go 7-9.

They have played Tampa and Atlanta and they played Tenn in the first half of the year before the turn around.

Not a tougher schedule regardless of what the % says.

Marcellus · 12-10-2009, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I don't give a shit about Denver. They have nothing to do with this:

Well the point it still valid. Your wrong about the strength of schedule between this year and last.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-10-2009, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Yeah, the old adage of lies, damn lies and statistics is coming into play here.

Colts/Saints screw up the curve.

Tits were 0-6 or whatever when we played them, then they switched QBs and became a real NFL team.

Other htan the Colts/Saints, not a single team that we've played this year has a winning record at the moment. That's a whole bunch of average.

Did you play those teams, or not?

Winning percentage doesn't lie.

If you want to talk about curves, let's talk about how much tougher this year's schedule is statistically, while you're facing 3 green QB's inside the division.

2009 Division winning percentage: .444

2008 Division winning percentage: .562

You faced 3 teams last year with less than 5 wins.

This year, you're already guaranteed to face no more than one: Tampa.

There is NOTHING that can back up the claim that last year's schedule was harder than this years.

Rasputin · 12-10-2009, 10:50 AM

We are 41 / 171 on 3rd down conversions. the QB gets paid to make 3rd down conversions. Matt has 349 attempt with 188 completions & a qb raiting 72.3 but the team sucks around him so its not his fault. this kind of reminds me of the Huard lovers it was never his fault.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-10-2009, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Well the point it still valid. Your wrong about the strength of schedule between this year and last.

Are you ****ing blind?

.516 > .480

The Colts-Saints "curve" is a bunch of bullshit.

That's like saying that facing KC, STL and SEA last year blows the curve for the 2008 record.

The Patriots have played better teams this year, period, and the stats bear that out - and that's with the division getting weaker.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-10-2009, 10:52 AM

@ "drives the average down..."

NO SHIT, SHERLOCK.

The winning percentage is down last year because THEY DIDN'T PLAY AS TOUGH OF A SCHEDULE.

Marcellus · 12-10-2009, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

@ "drives the average down..."

NO SHIT, SHERLOCK.

The winning percentage is down last year because THEY DIDN'T PLAY AS TOUGH OF A SCHEDULE.

Honestly you are the blind dumbass on this one. 2 teams driving the number down, the other 14 games were tougher on avg.

This year 2 12-0 teams drive the avg up. 2 tough games the other 14 easier.

Would you rather have 2 easy games and 14 tougher ones or 2 tough ones and 14 easier ones? I think you know the answer to that.

You talk as if you should be smart enough to understand this. Sorry I misjudged you.

Actually look at the ****ing schedule this year and last and how it played out rather than looking up your % and acting like it is empirical proof.

Mile High Mania · 12-10-2009, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Did you play those teams, or not?

Winning percentage doesn't lie.

If you want to talk about curves, let's talk about how much tougher this year's schedule is statistically, while you're facing 3 green QB's inside the division.

2009 Division winning percentage: .444

2008 Division winning percentage: .562

You faced 3 teams last year with less than 5 wins.

This year, you're already guaranteed to face no more than one: Tampa.

There is NOTHING that can back up the claim that last year's schedule was harder than this years.

What makes the 5 win mark so special? I'm just curious... I view it as under .500, at .500 or over .500.

NE was 11-5 in 2008...

At the end of 16 games...
- they had played 7 games against teams that finished over .500 (MIA x2, NYJ x2, IND, PIT, AZ)
- they had played 2 games against teams @ .500 (SD and DEN)
- they had played 7 games against teams < .500 (KC , SF, STL, BUF x2, SEA, OAK)

So, 9 of their 16 games were against teams at or below .500.

In 2008, the Patriots had 7 wins against the less than .500 teams, 1 win against the .500 teams and won 3 of 7 against the teams over .500 ... so, 8 of their 11 wins were against the poor teams.

So, through 12 games in 2009, the Patriots have only played three games against teams with a record better than .500. In all of 2008, they had played in 7 of those games.

The four remaining games for NE... CAR, BUF, JAX, HOU ... only 1 of those three teams is over .500.

So, at this pace... they'll end 2009 with a mere 4 games against teams that finished the season better than .500 compared to last year when they had 7 of those games.

Plus, just within the AFCE in 2008... it was incredibly more difficult than it has been so far.

Please, tell me where I'm wrong.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 12-10-2009, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Well the point it still valid. Your wrong about the strength of schedule between this year and last.

I still can't believe how much of a ****ing moron you really are.

Marcellus · 12-10-2009, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I still can't believe how much of a ****ing moron you really are.

Go back and read the actual posts you arrogant asshat. The point is ****ing valid and if you cant understand it your not as bright as you make yourself out to be.

12-09-2009, 03:11 PM
Red Dawg Going home eventually Join Date: Dec 2002 Casino cash: $1172858	Brady has lost 5 with the same players Matt had... just saying Matt haters need to get real. The team is awful not Matt.
Posts: 33,179

12-10-2009, 10:35 AM	#109
Tribal Warfare Man of Culture Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Far Beyond Comprehension Casino cash: $-3057187	You got to love some guys are comparing a FHOFer who is Brady to a game manager in Cassel __________________
Posts: 43,460

12-10-2009, 10:50 AM	#114
Rasputin Tip of the hat LIV Champs Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: ks Casino cash: $-14579	We are 41 / 171 on 3rd down conversions. the QB gets paid to make 3rd down conversions. Matt has 349 attempt with 188 completions & a qb raiting 72.3 but the team sucks around him so its not his fault. this kind of reminds me of the Huard lovers it was never his fault.
Posts: 56,933

12-10-2009, 10:52 AM	#116
OnTheWarpath15 MVP Join Date: Sep 2005 Casino cash: $2041115	@ "drives the average down..." NO SHIT, SHERLOCK. The winning percentage is down last year because THEY DIDN'T PLAY AS TOUGH OF A SCHEDULE.
Posts: 60,758