Chiefs Brady has lost 5 with the same players Matt had... - Page 12

Red Dawg · 12-09-2009, 03:11 PM

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

Rasputin · 12-10-2009, 02:47 PM

I can understand why people like Cassel and put there hope in him much like they did with Huard. He won games for New England so why can't he do it here. But Cmon he is stinking up the place like Huard did his final games its that obvious. Maybe Cassel can turn it around when D Bowe comes back and maybe I am being too hard on him since his line let him down most of the season and his recievers drop balls but Cmon he hasn't shown me anything that he can take this team as bad as it is to a new level and make this team better. That's what a leader does, that's what the QB is suppose to do.

I'm not blaming Cassel for all the losses but I am blaming him for 3rd down conversons that falls strait on his lap. I am also blaming him for lack of total offensive production for the most part any other QB comming here would be blamed too. I think we can do better for QB like through the Draft or see what Brodie can do with the same team. Not sold on Cassel.

Chiefnj2 · 12-10-2009, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

I'm already tired of these ridiculous threads, watching games Cassel in a Chiefs uni looks like shit, that's what matters.

The entire team and coaching except for kicker, punter, Hali and Flowers look like shit.

**DaneMcCloud** · 12-10-2009, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania

But, I do like to look at more than just the numbers... stats can lie.

You're right: Cassel was much worse last Sunday than his 14.6 QB rating.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-10-2009, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

All the drafturbators are mad because their old argument that Cassel took a 16-0 team and could only win 11 games is now being turned against them. Get over it. It was a dumb argument to begin with.

I may have missed it, but I've yet to see someone that is considered part of that "group" make those claims in seriousness.

I'd love see one.

Mecca · 12-10-2009, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

The entire team and coaching except for kicker, punter, Hali and Flowers look like shit.

Yea and considering this guy is suppose to be the franchise, that's a problem. It's not like we're losing games and he's looking good and making progress.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-10-2009, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania

I didn't remove the .500 teams for any reason other than to look at the "winning" teams they played. It has nothing to do with supporting my argument.

Early on, I said I view this as below, at or over .500 and I've stuck with that theme during my commentary. You and I view things differently.

I look at teams and their schedules and when trying to determine who had the harder road, I say "Who played the most teams at .500 or below and who played the most over .500?"

The Broncos were .500 last year... did they scare anyone or when you think of them, do you consider them as a "tough" team that was played? The Chargers were also .500 and they went to the playoffs... hard to really judge those .500 and below teams, so I group them together.

When it's all said and done, I think the 2008 schedule will prove to be tougher than 2009 for NE... no matter how you view it.

Yeah, those 9-7 teams scare me shit-ton more than those 8-8 teams.

If you just stick to the goddamn equation the league fins important, there's not reason to try to distinguish the difference between an 8-8 team and a 9-7 team.

.516 > .480

Mile High Mania · 12-10-2009, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Yeah, those 9-7 teams scare me shit-tom more than those 8-8 teams.

The point is... I'm right and you're wrong, it's really pretty simple. We can revisit in four weeks.

Mile High Mania · 12-10-2009, 03:01 PM

Hey ... is there a site that shows the opponents winning % by team each year or are you going through and adding this up on your own? I'm not debating your numbers, was thinking of something else and wanted to ask.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-10-2009, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania

The point is... I'm right and you're wrong, it's really pretty simple. We can revisit in four weeks.

There won't be much to revisit.

If I did the math correctly, Patriots opponents only have to win 37.5% of their remaining games to keep the 2009 overall winning percentage over last season's .480.

24 wins out of 64 games. .375

1.5 wins per team.

Hell, the Colts and Saints could lose out, and the rest would still only have to go .428 the last 4 weeks.

Throw Tampa in there too. If any three teams were to lose out, the remaining 13 teams would have to go .500.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-10-2009, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania

Hey ... is there a site that shows the opponents winning % by team each year or are you going through and adding this up on your own? I'm not debating your numbers, was thinking of something else and wanted to ask.

Did it myself.

Pretty easy to do when you only have 2 seasons to deal with.

Ask away. If I have time, I'll do the research.

Mile High Mania · 12-10-2009, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Did it myself.

Pretty easy to do when you only have 2 seasons to deal with.

Ask away. If I have time, I'll do the research.

No worries... was just going to look at a few scenarios on another topic involving the 0-16 Lions and a team or two from last season. But, it would take more time than it's worth really...

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-10-2009, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania

No worries... was just going to look at a few scenarios on another topic involving the 0-16 Lions and a team or two from last season. But, it would take more time than it's worth really...

If you're going where I think you're wanting to go, see if this helps.

I'm assuming you're thinking somewhere along the lines of an 0-16 team weakening your SOS.

Obviously, they are going to, as they should. You played the weakest team in the league.

Here's what it does to SOS:

There are 256 games in a NFL season.

The difference between playing an 0-16 team and others, assuming all other opponents were .500 for convenience sake:

0-16: SOS = .468

Replace that 0-16 team with a 2-14 team:

2-14: SOS = .476

4-12: SOS = .484

Not the significant difference you might expect.

orange · 12-10-2009, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

If you're going where I think you're wanting to go, see if this helps.

I'm assuming you're thinking somewhere along the lines of an 0-16 team weakening your SOS.

Obviously, they are going to, as they should. You played the weakest team in the league.

Here's what it does to SOS:

There are 256 games in a NFL season.

The difference between playing an 0-16 team and others, assuming all other opponents were .500 for convenience sake:

0-16: SOS = .468

Replace that 0-16 team with a 2-14 team:

2-14: SOS = .476

4-12: SOS = .484

Not the significant difference you might expect.

Looks to me like each win is worth .004. So you could do ANY record quick and easy.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 12-10-2009, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

I'm already tired of these ridiculous threads, watching games Cassel in a Chiefs uni looks like shit, that's what matters.

Were we really so bad off from Herm that we couldn't guarantee a five-win season under the new regime?

The whole thing is utterly ridiculous and makes no sense. They trade a 2nd round pick for a win now QB and a win now, broke-dick LB, do nothing to protect the win now QB, throw darts at a board until ONE player shows up to help the QB by catching his noodle-armed passes, and scrap a defensive foundation for a new scheme which they promptly turn over to a graduate from the ****her School of Uselessness.

How do these guys NOT get a D- or a straight-up F?

Mile High Mania · 12-10-2009, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

If you're going where I think you're wanting to go, see if this helps.

I'm assuming you're thinking somewhere along the lines of an 0-16 team weakening your SOS.

Obviously, they are going to, as they should. You played the weakest team in the league.

Here's what it does to SOS:

There are 256 games in a NFL season.

The difference between playing an 0-16 team and others, assuming all other opponents were .500 for convenience sake:

0-16: SOS = .468

Replace that 0-16 team with a 2-14 team:

2-14: SOS = .476

4-12: SOS = .484

Not the significant difference you might expect.

That's in the ballpark of where I was going, but I was looking at comparing Indy since they played DET (I believe) and another similar team that didn't play DET.

I don't know how valid your numbers are considering you account for all other teams being .500 in that scenario. Granted, I suck at math and maybe your rationale makes sense. But, yeah ... since you were saying that the two 12-0 teams have no real bearing on NE's SOS in 2009 vs 2008... I was looking at the opposite end of that spectrum.

But, it's interesting, you said it's obvious that an 0-16 team would weaken their SOS... yet, you're saying the 12-0 teams won't inflate. Oh well.. we'll touch base in a month.

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, 02:47 PM	#166
Rasputin Tip of the hat LIV Champs Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: ks Casino cash: $-14579	I can understand why people like Cassel and put there hope in him much like they did with Huard. He won games for New England so why can't he do it here. But Cmon he is stinking up the place like Huard did his final games its that obvious. Maybe Cassel can turn it around when D Bowe comes back and maybe I am being too hard on him since his line let him down most of the season and his recievers drop balls but Cmon he hasn't shown me anything that he can take this team as bad as it is to a new level and make this team better. That's what a leader does, that's what the QB is suppose to do. I'm not blaming Cassel for all the losses but I am blaming him for 3rd down conversons that falls strait on his lap. I am also blaming him for lack of total offensive production for the most part any other QB comming here would be blamed too. I think we can do better for QB like through the Draft or see what Brodie can do with the same team. Not sold on Cassel.
Posts: 56,933

12-10-2009, 03:01 PM	#173
Mile High Mania #triggering Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Tejas Casino cash: $857229	Hey ... is there a site that shows the opponents winning % by team each year or are you going through and adding this up on your own? I'm not debating your numbers, was thinking of something else and wanted to ask. __________________
Posts: 30,915