Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

I'm 61, When will Jets win next SuperBowl?

I'm 61, When will Jets win next SuperBowl?   32 votes

  1. 1. I'm 61, When will Jets win next SuperBowl?

    • While I can still know whats happening and enjoy it?
      14
    • While JGB's is changing my Diaper whilst I live on his Living Room couch
      4
    • I am on the wrong side of dirt?
      14

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.


73 posts in this topic

Posted (edited) · Report post

When will it happen? 

I saw SB III with my Dad when I was 16. Little did i realize I would have a wife, 3 kids, 5 grandkids and 42 years with IBM next month before I have seen another :(

 

Vote your choice...............

Edited by SouthernJet
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Well, you predicted the Jets would at least be in the Super Bowl by 2016...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

Let's think about it mathematically. There are 32 teams. 100/32 * 100% = 3.125% chance to win in a given year. So then there is a 96.875% chance of not winning the Superbowl in any year. You can multiply the 96.875% by itself for each year to determine the chances we will not win it that many times in a row.

 

Odds of going this long without winning

  • 1 year:   96.875%
  • 3 years: 90.9%
  • 5 years: 85.3%
  • 7 years: 80.0%
  • 10 years (probably when you'll be in diapers): 72.8%
  • 16 years (which correlates to the avg USA male life expectancy of 77 years): 60.2%

If you live to the expected age of 77 years, you've got about a 40% shot of seeing them win. It doesn't go above 50% until you'll be 83. So you better eat right and exercise!

Edited by jgb
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

When will it happen? 

I saw SB III with my Dad when I was 16. Little did i realize I would have a wife, 3 kids, 5 grandkids and 42 years with IBM next month before I have seen another :(

 

Vote your choice...............

This year buddy. You felt a "tremor in the force" remember? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

sorry bud...you and I won't see it happen I'm afraid. :russian:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

This year buddy. You felt a "tremor in the force" remember? 

 

yeah well he had mexican food for lunch so it could be that

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Let's think about it mathematically. There are 32 teams. 100/32 * 100% = 3.125% chance to win in a given year. So then there is a 96.875% chance of not winning the Superbowl in any year. You can multiply the 96.875% by itself for each year to determine the chances we will not win it that many times in a row.

 

Odds of going this long without winning

  • 1 year:   96.875%
  • 3 years: 90.9%
  • 5 years: 85.3%
  • 7 years: 80.0%
  • 10 years (probably when you'll be in diapers): 72.8%
  • 16 years (which correlates to the avg USA male life expectancy of 77 years): 60.2%
If you live to the expected age of 77 years, you've got about a 40% shot of seeing them win. It doesn't go above 50% until you'll be 83. So you better eat right and exercise!

I'm pretty sure statistics don't work that way

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

I'm pretty sure statistics don't work that way

 

well stats can't account for the jets miserable luck, horrid mismanagement, and joe willy's deal with the devil. it can only tell you the chance of something happen with a lot of assumptions made: that all teams have an equal chance each year, which we obviously know isn't true. basically, this analysis is what would happen if you rolled a 32-sided die, what are chances of a certain number of rolls going by without your number coming up.

 

the reality is SJ would probably have to live to Methusala age to see a jets' title, but trying to give the old man some hope :)

Edited by jgb
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

yeah well he had mexican food for lunch so it could be that

ChiliFart.jpg

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

ChiliFart.jpg

 

on the flip side, he's a great guy to bring camping

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

The problem with analysis is that it's based on decisions WE make.

 

The Patriots didn't win until the Jets picked up Mo Lewis.

Edited by JerryK
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I am surprised more folks dont want me on JGBs couch crapping my pants.. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Fountain of Youth in Florida start packing

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

John Titor says the Jets win it this year.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Let's think about it mathematically. There are 32 teams. 100/32 * 100% = 3.125% chance to win in a given year. So then there is a 96.875% chance of not winning the Superbowl in any year. You can multiply the 96.875% by itself for each year to determine the chances we will not win it that many times in a row.

 

Odds of going this long without winning

  • 1 year:   96.875%
  • 3 years: 90.9%
  • 5 years: 85.3%
  • 7 years: 80.0%
  • 10 years (probably when you'll be in diapers): 72.8%
  • 16 years (which correlates to the avg USA male life expectancy of 77 years): 60.2%

If you live to the expected age of 77 years, you've got about a 40% shot of seeing them win. It doesn't go above 50% until you'll be 83. So you better eat right and exercise!

 

Mathematically, this isn't really right for a couple of reasons:

 

1.  There haven't always been 32 teams.

 

2.  In any given year there are teams like the 2012 or 2013 Jets that have no realistic chance before the season even began.  In other words, while both the 2013 Jets and 2013 Seahawks are each 1 of 32 NFL teams, they do not each have 1 in 32 chances of winning the superbowl.  The Seahawks' chances were greater than 1/32 and the Jets' chances were less.  Every year the Jets have a realistic shot, their odds are better than 1/32 since there weren't 31 other teams with realistic chances in each one of those seasons.

 

This coming year, for example, the Raiders will not be competing for a superbowl.  Within a couple of weeks into September (if it takes that long) you can mentally cross out a number of teams.  If you cross out 8 of them, and one of them isn't the Jets, then we're 1 of 24 teams with an actual shot rather than 1 of 32 teams.

 

Of course this goes out the window when we're one of those teams (like the past 2 Jets' teams that were gutted by injuries, paying the piper on previous salary cap excesses, and betting on some high-priced players that proved unworthy of this team commitment).  If you don't have the players, you don't have a 1/32 chance like pulling a winning ball out of a container of 32 numbers.

Summary:  your dad is f*cked.  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

just be happy that you watched them win it once.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I am surprised more folks dont want me on JGBs couch crapping my pants..

How would we be able to tell the difference?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Mathematically, this isn't really right for a couple of reasons:

 

1.  There haven't always been 32 teams.

 

2.  In any given year there are teams like the 2012 or 2013 Jets that have no realistic chance before the season even began.  In other words, while both the 2013 Jets and 2013 Seahawks are each 1 of 32 NFL teams, they do not each have 1 in 32 chances of winning the superbowl.  The Seahawks' chances were greater than 1/32 and the Jets' chances were less.  Every year the Jets have a realistic shot, their odds are better than 1/32 since there weren't 31 other teams with realistic chances in each one of those seasons.

 

This coming year, for example, the Raiders will not be competing for a superbowl.  Within a couple of weeks into September (if it takes that long) you can mentally cross out a number of teams.  If you cross out 8 of them, and one of them isn't the Jets, then we're 1 of 24 teams with an actual shot rather than 1 of 32 teams.

 

Of course this goes out the window when we're one of those teams (like the past 2 Jets' teams that were gutted by injuries, paying the piper on previous salary cap excesses, and betting on some high-priced players that proved unworthy of this team commitment).  If you don't have the players, you don't have a 1/32 chance like pulling a winning ball out of a container of 32 numbers.

Summary:  your dad is f*cked.  

 

the math is correct but it will not be accurate over short timeframes, however over long periods of time (perhaps 100+ years), it is a reasonably safe assumption that injuries, bad coaching, etc would even out and affect all teams relatively the same.

 

this started as a joke, it is amusing that people actually want to have a discussion about statistics here. first time i haven't been appauled by my fellow JN posters :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

the math is correct but it will not be accurate over short timeframes, however over long periods of time (perhaps 100+ years), it is a reasonably safe assumption that injuries, bad coaching, etc would even out and affect all teams relatively the same.

 

this started as a joke, it is amusing that people actually want to have a discussion about statistics here. first time i haven't been appauled by my fellow JN posters :)

 

Im in, I am a statistician.

 

As long as Rex is the coach, the probability of the Jets winning, given Rex HC = about 1/128 = 0.78125% chance of winning the SB.

 

I give the fan base about 5 more years of Rexcuses, before they turn on him and demand a non average coach.

 

Problem is, Woodrow will likely still be the owner, so the probability does not go up. I would stick with the probability in a given year for the Jets of 1/128 forever for purposes of these statistics.

-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Im in, I am a statistician.

 

As long as Rex is the coach, the probability of the Jets winning, given Rex HC = about 1/128 = 0.78125% chance of winning the SB.

 

I give the fan base about 5 more years of Rexcuses, before they turn on him and demand a non average coach.

 

Problem is, Woodrow will likely still be the owner, so the probability does not go up. I would stick with the probability in a given year for the Jets of 1/128 forever for purposes of these statistics.

 

hard to argue. jets aren't winning with rex. so if you want to see a jets title, you need to root for rex to get the boot.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

hard to argue. jets aren't winning with rex. so if you want to see a jets title, you need to root for rex to get the boot.

 

Problem is I have no faith that Herman or Woodrow will pick someone who can win it all.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

the math is correct but it will not be accurate over short timeframes, however over long periods of time (perhaps 100+ years), it is a reasonably safe assumption that injuries, bad coaching, etc would even out and affect all teams relatively the same.

 

this started as a joke, it is amusing that people actually want to have a discussion about statistics here. first time i haven't been appauled by my fellow JN posters :)

 

No, over long periods it would still be less than 1/32 any season. Every year there are multiple teams that had no realistic shot.  Who those teams are may change from one year to the next, but it is a constant.  A mid-90s Bengals team did not have a 1/28 chance even though they were 1 of 28 teams.

 

And I didn't mean to paul you.  I don't even know who paul is, really, but I promise that wasn't my intention.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

No, over long periods it would still be less than 1/32 any season. Every year there are multiple teams that had no realistic shot.  Who those teams are may change from one year to the next, but it is a constant.  A mid-90s Bengals team did not have a 1/28 chance even though they were 1 of 28 teams.

 

And I didn't mean to paul you.  I don't even know who paul is, really, but I promise that wasn't my intention.

 

my point is over many years it doesn't matter if any individual year is 1/32 or not, some years will be more, some less, but the larger the sample size, the greater the likelihood that the average chance per year is around 1/32 and the more unlikely that an individual team lies outside of that by more than a standard deviation, but my ti-86 hasn't had batteries in it for 15 years so i don't know what that is exactly.

Edited by jgb
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

How would we be able to tell the difference?

Not me, LOL.,.Him having to change me.. although I assume he'd have his Maid do it..

 

Note to self: Have JGBs hire a 21 yr old Maid in French Maid outfit

Edited by SouthernJet
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

my point is over many years it doesn't matter if any individual year is 1/32 or not, some years will be more, some less, but the larger the sample size, the greater the likelihood that the average chance per year is around 1/32 and the more unlikely that an individual team lies outside of that by more than a standard deviation, but my ti-86 hasn't had batteries in it for 15 years so i don't know what that is exactly.

 

There weren't 32 teams when your ti-86 had batteries.  

 

Even still, I don't believe theoretical chances equates to actual chances.  Theoretically, any team any year could go 16-0.  In reality, though, we know that it's an absurd statement.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.