Jump to content

Jets had easiest SOS last year?


TuscanyTile2

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, joewilly12 said:

Please go away,you are annoying and you are irritating other posters like a case of jock itch. I dont like you and I dont care what you think about football I know a monkey who knows more about the Jets than you do. Shoo 

What the hell does integrity28 have to do with any of this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Jet9 said:

What record would you guys have been happy with? 16-0? 13-3?

 

 

 

Also, the 'the other team was injured' is never an excuse in any sport at any time. Injuries are part of the game, along with sh*tty refs, bad weather, and salary cap issues. You field the best team you can. 

 

If you went into an injury ravaged team and asked if it was OK they lost because they were banged up they'd probably bang YOU up.

I would have been jolly with a playoff birth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These SOS things are BS in this day & age in the NFL. The parity in the NFL is real. Ever try to play those illegal NFL pick em cards? If it was easy, people could make a living off of them, but they're very difficult to be consistent at picking winners.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jetster said:

These SOS things are BS in this day & age in the NFL. The parity in the NFL is real. Ever try to play those illegal NFL pick em cards? If it was easy, people could make a living off of them, but they're very difficult to be consistent at picking winners.

 

There may be a decent amount of parity in the NFL, but if at the end of the year your opponents have a win% in the 400s, you've had yourself a much easier time versus another team whose opponents had a win% in the 600s.

SOS definitely still means something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Jetster said:

These SOS things are BS in this day & age in the NFL. The parity in the NFL is real. Ever try to play those illegal NFL pick em cards? If it was easy, people could make a living off of them, but they're very difficult to be consistent at picking winners.

 

What are you basing this claim on? Favored NFL teams won outright 62.78% of the time in 2015

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎4‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 8:05 PM, TuscanyTile2 said:

I knew we had an easy schedule but I didn't realize it was the easiest in the league (.441).  Interestingly it was tied w/ Carolina.

We need to strongly improve to even get to .500 next year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_NFL_draft

 

 

Completely agreed. We faced a whole sh*tload of cupcake pussies last season. Still, we only beat ONE team with a winning record last season and one team in 2014. We are NOT a proven team. In fact, we are very unproven. It's nice to see the Jets experience some winning , but had we made the playoffs, we would have gotten thrashed without mercy in the 1st round. We need to improve, mostly on offense and special teams if we plan on competing with the best teams.

With that said, we have a few pieces and that's a nice start. I hope Mac adds a TE. Going without one is not only very predictable, but it basically leaves the offense with no relief outlets. We will NEVER win the SB without a TE. NEVER. The OL definitely needs to improve. I would love to see Mac add a better FB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On April 12, 2016 at 11:28 PM, Bleedin Green said:

There's another reason it's flawed (but like you say, doesn't necessarily aid or hurt the Jets this year, and certainly isn't as indicative of opponent difficulty as multiple key opponent injuries). When you play a team at either extreme it brings up/down the mean too much for a stat where n=16 (games). If it was 116 games or 1016 games then those outliers become insignificant. 

Look at it this way. Which is an easier schedule? (opponent # of wins):

Schedule a = 15, 6, 6, 7, 6 = 40 wins

Schedule b = 9, 9, 10, 9, 2 = 39 wins

Schedule a has the tougher SOS according to the NFL formula, but we all know schedule b is definitely harder, playing 4 winning teams out of 5 while schedule a only has one winning team on its schedule. That one game may be an "automatic" loss, but if you're only an 8-8 type team you have an excellent chance of going 4-1 in that stretch. The other schedule you'd theoretically go 1-4 or at best 2-3. Yet the harder schedule is deemed mathematically easier.

That's the #1 reason why it's bullsh*t IMO. The sample size is too small, A larger sample would render W/L outliers (and games against injury-riddled opponents) insignificant.

And yes, to your point, which just throws gasoline on the fire, a 15-1 team appears to have faced an easier schedule than a 4-12 team even if they faced 100% identical opponents, because their own win % influences the SOS formula. In fact, those teams' head to head match-ups would be a big, lopsided factor itself yet team 2's fans would gripe about the "unfair" schedule disparity their own team influenced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

There's another reason it's flawed (but like you say, doesn't necessarily aid or hurt the Jets this year, and certainly isn't as indicative of opponent difficulty as multiple key opponent injuries). When you play a team at either extreme it brings up/down the mean too much for a stat where n=16 (games). If it was 116 games or 1016 games then those outliers become insignificant. 

Look at it this way. Which is an easier schedule (opponent # of wins):

Schedule a = 15, 6, 6, 7, 6 = 40 wins

Schedule b = 9, 9, 10, 9, 2 = 39 wins

Schedule a has the tougher SOS according to the NFL formula, but we all know schedule b is definitely harder, playing 4 winning teams out of 5 while schedule a only has one winning team on its schedule. That one game may be an "automatic" loss, but if you're only an 8-8 type team you have an excellent chance of going 4-1 in that stretch. The other schedule you'd theoretically go 1-4 or at best 2-3. Yet the harder schedule is deemed mathematically easier.

That's the #1 reason why it's bullsh*t IMO. The sample size is too small, A larger sample would render W/L outliers (and games against injury-riddled opponents) insignificant.

And yes, to your point, which just throws gasoline on the fire, a 15-1 team appears to have faced an easier schedule than a 4-12 team even if they faced 100% identical opponents, because their own win % influences the SOS formula. In fact, those teams' head to head match-ups would be a big, lopsided factor itself yet team 2's fans would gripe about the "unfair" schedule disparity their own team influenced.

Great analysis! Let me also add that for the Jets & the rest of the AFC East, having to play the Patriots who are perennial playoff contenders for 12 years because of the great Tom Brady each & every year have a tough schedule. Trying not to lose 2 games vs that team! Look at KC rattling off all those wins last year, it's a little different if they're going to Foxboro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This team was 4-12 the year before with the worst talent in the league.  While things can turn around quickly in this league I think it's still a major accomplishment to go from 4-12 to 10-6.  I've said here a million times and I'll say it again, Macc is playing a tricky game of trying to keep this team competitive while essentially trying to rebuild the roster.  Look back at past drafts and you'll see this is far from a one year fix.  I'm not trying to say we'll stink this year but I'm trying to say that I think there's still a ton of work to be done before we can expect a consistent competitor every year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, drsamuel84 said:

This team was 4-12 the year before with the worst talent in the league.  While things can turn around quickly in this league I think it's still a major accomplishment to go from 4-12 to 10-6.  I've said here a million times and I'll say it again, Macc is playing a tricky game of trying to keep this team competitive while essentially trying to rebuild the roster.  Look back at past drafts and you'll see this is far from a one year fix.  I'm not trying to say we'll stink this year but I'm trying to say that I think there's still a ton of work to be done before we can expect a consistent competitor every year. 

Not really a tricky game. Good GM's do this on a consistent basis. Look at the Pittsburgh Steelers. They are competitive every year while continuously rebuilding their roster. They've been to the playoffs like 15 years in a row or something like that. 

Macc understands that this isnt just about "Winning Now" or building for a good team 3 years from now. Every year you should be competing. Yes, some years competing for a SB is highly unlikely, but every team should be competing for the playoffs every single year. If you're not eyeing the playoffs every year then there's a problem. John Idzik tried that 3 year plan basically dismantling the team his first 2 seasons and he never got a chance to get to that pivotal 3rd year because it was a failure. Tanny was always in win now mode, always being a free agency darling. Yet outside of D'Brick, Mangold, Revis and Harris, Tanny had a terrible time during free agency, along with creating terrible contracts. 

 

Macc so far has shown great ability to deal in free agency. Forget last year, just look at what he did in FA this year, and I think he only had like 11 million in cap space to start. he's shown trading ability, turning two 5th round picks into Brandon Marshal and Ryan Clady. He's been solid in the draft getting replacements for guys like Wilkerson in Williams and drafting a promising LB'er in Mauldin. Devin Smith still has an opportunity to contribute for as long as we get a QB that can compliment his skillset. 

 

Macc is ballin' if you ask me. I gave Idzik the benefit of the doubt because at one time I did think that the purge was necessary. And though I still feel that way, when you purge a team in order to rebuild...it sounds good when you say it, but it looks REALLY BAD when you go through it...to the point where though the owner went in perfectly understanding what was going to happen ended up canning him before he could even complete it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Villain The Foe said:

Not really a tricky game. Good GM's do this on a consistent basis. Look at the Pittsburgh Steelers. They are competitive every year while continuously rebuilding their roster. They've been to the playoffs like 15 years in a row or something like that. 

Macc understands that this isnt just about "Winning Now" or building for a good team 3 years from now. Every year you should be competing. Yes, some years competing for a SB is highly unlikely, but every team should be competing for the playoffs every single year. If you're not eyeing the playoffs every year then there's a problem. John Idzik tried that 3 year plan basically dismantling the team his first 2 seasons and he never got a chance to get to that pivotal 3rd year because it was a failure. Tanny was always in win now mode, always being a free agency darling. Yet outside of D'Brick, Mangold, Revis and Harris, Tanny had a terrible time during free agency, along with creating terrible contracts. 

 

Macc so far has shown great ability to deal in free agency. Forget last year, just look at what he did in FA this year, and I think he only had like 11 million in cap space to start. he's shown trading ability, turning two 5th round picks into Brandon Marshal and Ryan Clady. He's been solid in the draft getting replacements for guys like Wilkerson in Williams and drafting a promising LB'er in Mauldin. Devin Smith still has an opportunity to contribute for as long as we get a QB that can compliment his skillset. 

 

Macc is ballin' if you ask me. I gave Idzik the benefit of the doubt because at one time I did think that the purge was necessary. And though I still feel that way, when you purge a team in order to rebuild...it sounds good when you say it, but it looks REALLY BAD when you go through it...to the point where though the owner went in perfectly understanding what was going to happen ended up canning him before he could even complete it. 

 

Umm, the key there is to rebuild, which Idzik didn't. I still maintain that he doesn't really understand what a cornerback actually does. Let us never speak of Idzik again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Freemanm said:

Umm, the key there is to rebuild, which Idzik didn't. I still maintain that he doesn't really understand what a cornerback actually does. Let us never speak of Idzik again.

I didnt say that Idzik's philosophy was right, but rather to the contrary. Tanny was on "win now" looking to be the free agent champion yet not consistently hitting on talent in the draft. Idzik just wanted to blow it up and rebuild come year 3....the problem with that is it looks bad when you draft a QB during your first season then decide to give him nothing as you proceed on tanking consecutive seasons and purging the team of talent.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Freemanm said:

Umm, the key there is to rebuild, which Idzik didn't. I still maintain that he doesn't really understand what a cornerback actually does. Let us never speak of Idzik again.

Idzik did most things right as a Gm except draft well.  And for that he paid the price as he should have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Villain The Foe said:

I didnt say that Idzik's philosophy was right, but rather to the contrary. Tanny was on "win now" looking to be the free agent champion yet not consistently hitting on talent in the draft. Idzik just wanted to blow it up and rebuild come year 3....the problem with that is it looks bad when you draft a QB during your first season then decide to give him nothing as you proceed on tanking consecutive seasons and purging the team of talent.

 

Actually I think his philosophy was right. His execution, not so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Actually I think his philosophy was right. His execution, not so much.

As I stated in my initial post, I was in agreement with it. I think what made me change my mind is the fact that when you're hired and this method is on the board the owner completely understands and is ready to do what must be done. 2 years into it the owner is being heckled by fans, Planes are flying all over practice fields. Fans are paying thousands of dollars to put up billboards. Fans are even more pissed about PSL's and attending games that are basically no competitive given the deconstruction of the team. 

 

The philosophy was right....but it will still cost you your job and you'll end up purging a team for someone else's benefit. I cant say that Idzik didnt execute because he didnt get his 3 years. He never got the chance to spend the money that he was purging the team in order to get. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Villain The Foe said:

As I stated in my initial post, I was in agreement with it. I think what made me change my mind is the fact that when you're hired and this method is on the board the owner completely understands and is ready to do what must be done. 2 years into it the owner is being heckled by fans, Planes are flying all over practice fields. Fans are paying thousands of dollars to put up billboards. Fans are even more pissed about PSL's and attending games that are basically no competitive given the deconstruction of the team. 

 

The philosophy was right....but it will still cost you your job and you'll end up purging a team for someone else's benefit. I cant say that Idzik didnt execute because he didnt get his 3 years. He never got the chance to spend the money that he was purging the team in order to get. 

Year 1 I don't know what the philosophy was supposed to be any different, philosophically speaking. The team was in serious cap trouble, and he parlayed the only valuable trade bait into a #1 and #3 while he was still rehabbing an ACL injury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Year 1 I don't know what the philosophy was supposed to be any different, philosophically speaking. The team was in serious cap trouble, and he parlayed the only valuable trade bait into a #1 and #3 while he was still rehabbing an ACL injury.

Exactly! Add to that he got Ivory for I believe a 4th rounder. Idzik had his moments....but when "you're the guy" that has to tank a team???? ha....good luck! lol. 

 

Talk about a dude that "took one for the team".  yet he'll probably be hated forever for it! lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Villain The Foe said:

Exactly! Add to that he got Ivory for I believe a 4th rounder. Idzik had his moments....but when "you're the guy" that has to tank a team???? ha....good luck! lol. 

 

Talk about a dude that "took one for the team".  yet he'll probably be hated forever for it! lol. 

I wouldn't go that far. He deserved to get fired. I was just speaking to the general philosophy, especially when walking into a zero-expectations season with a bad roster despite such cap problems that he was largely excused for signing basically nobody and even for trading away Revis (including winning a game of chicken with Tampa). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I wouldn't go that far. He deserved to get fired. I was just speaking to the general philosophy, especially when walking into a zero-expectations season with a bad roster despite such cap problems that he was largely excused for signing basically nobody and even for trading away Revis (including winning a game of chicken with Tampa). 

Im speaking to that general philosophy too....saying that if you go that route you're probably going to end up being fired. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Idzik did most things right as a Gm except draft well.  And for that he paid the price as he should have.

He F'd up the whole CB thing too ... And the Santonio Holmes move was a "try my scared *$$ off to save my job last minute chicken-$h*t !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...