Jump to content

The other question besides Rex...


Freemanm
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well, we beat the Vegas over/under.

EXTENSIONS FOR EVERYONE

 

What was their median on the Falcons? Panthers? Texans? Chiefs? Giants? Cardinals?

You keep ******* that rotten chicken!

 

Let's try this: you guys dig up a reputable source that says we were going to win 3 games this year, and we'll go from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know, but I do feel that he has shown enough where he deserves the opportunity to compete for the starting job next year against actual NFL quarterback talent.

  

Not enough info. Sign a vet, draft a rook, let 'em duke it out in August.

These. Jets need to bring in a QB or two who can legitimately compete with Geno for the starting job. Competition, except when it comes to my draft picks, that sort of thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is, but it's also weird. Everyone was picking the Jets to be one of the 5 worst teams in football this year.

That doesn't seem like a team that should be projected for 7.5.

I know nothing about them, their methods, accuracy rating, but I am interested. What I do want to know is, did the model have Sanchez playing QB? Besides a "yes" can anyone actually quote the study showing it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

EXTENSIONS FOR EVERYONE

 

 

Let's try this: you guys dig up a reputable source that says we were going to win 3 games this year, and we'll go from there.

No such thing exists if you say it doesn't, so why have this argument, I could say so, and so is reputable, but if it doesn't meet your agenda you will say so, and so isn't reputable, and around, and around we go!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FO's median projection for the 2013 Jets was 7.5. Keep f*cking that chicken.

 

False.

 

Sometimes pure stats over-analyze & over-think.  At some point they need to look at the results of their statistical analysis and ask themselves if any season ended the way they're predicting it's going to.  7.3 was the mean wins for the Jets using DVOA on September 4th.  But using DVOA also caused them to predict that no team in the NFL would finish with worse than a 6-10 record or better than an 11-5 record in 2013.  Lowest prediction was Minnesota at 5.7 wins (6-10 record) and Denver with 10.7 wins (11-5).

 

Literally, the stat model predicted that every team in the NFL would finish between 6-10 and 11-5.  That the team with the best regular-season record would finish with only 5 more wins than the team with the worst record.  That was their DVOA prediction, and even the writers on their own website know that was never going to happen.

 

By the way, Scott Kacsmar from FootballOutsiders predicted the Jets would be 3-13.  http://www.footballoutsiders.com/extra-points/2013/kacsmar-and-smiths-predict-2013-nfl-season.  He links to his predictions at the top of paragraph 2.

 

Then here they reference the DVOA-prediction article and the 11 writers predicted who would finish below their 2013 DVOA predictions and why.  Of the 11 writers, 3 of them specifically predicted the Jets' DVOA numbers were the most likely to be overrated.  As in they said their own website's DVOA prediction was faulty.  

 

Ben Muth from FootballOutsiders:  "I just can't see the Gang Green winning more than six games; the only thing worse than the Jets wideouts is the Jets quarterback situation. If I was Rex Ryan I'd rather watch Clemson play too."

 

Mike Ridley from FootballOutsiders (on why he felt the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the website's DVOA win prediction): "Mark Sanchez, Geno Smith, Brady Quinn..."

 

Another (Rob Weintraub) from FO also predicted the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the computer model's DVOA win prediction.  The last line in the article, he predicted the Jets to have the #1 pick in the 2014 draft (but only to be different because everyone else said Oakland would have the #1 pick and they'd take Clowney; still, it would seem that he felt the Jets would have the #2 overall pick at best).

 

So these are FooballOutsiders.com's OWN AUTHORS acknowledging that not only are those numbers not what they thought each team's win total would actually be, but with 32 teams to single out and choose from, 3 out of 11 pinpointed the Jets as the most likely to fall short of the 7.3 wins their model predicted (and listed players as the reason).  It means the authors thought that prediction was ridiculous based on the roster they headed into the season with.

 

Then these same authors took a stab at which teams they felt the computer model underestimated win totals.  Zero of them picked the Jets.

 

 

You would have to search high & low & cherry-pick the outliers to find people who firmly predicted the Jets would win 7 games this season.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

False.

Sometimes pure stats over-analyze & over-think. At some point they need to look at the results of their statistical analysis and ask themselves if any season ended the way they're predicting it's going to. 7.3 was the mean wins for the Jets using DVOA on September 4th. But using DVOA also caused them to predict that no team in the NFL would finish with worse than a 6-10 record or better than an 11-5 record in 2013. Lowest prediction was Minnesota at 5.7 wins (6-10 record) and Denver with 10.7 wins (11-5).

Literally, the stat model predicted that every team in the NFL would finish between 6-10 and 11-5. That the team with the best regular-season record would finish with only 5 more wins than the team with the worst record. That was their DVOA prediction, and even the writers on their own website know that was never going to happen.

By the way, Scott Kacsmar from FootballOutsiders predicted the Jets would be 3-13. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/extra-points/2013/kacsmar-and-smiths-predict-2013-nfl-season. He links to his predictions at the top of paragraph 2.

Then here they reference the DVOA-prediction article and the 11 writers predicted who would finish below their 2013 DVOA predictions and why. Of the 11 writers, 3 of them specifically predicted the Jets' DVOA numbers were the most likely to be overrated. As in they said their own website's DVOA prediction was faulty.

Ben Muth from FootballOutsiders: "I just can't see the Gang Green winning more than six games; the only thing worse than the Jets wideouts is the Jets quarterback situation. If I was Rex Ryan I'd rather watch Clemson play too."

Mike Ridley from FootballOutsiders (on why he felt the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the website's DVOA win prediction): "Mark Sanchez, Geno Smith, Brady Quinn..."

Another (Rob Weintraub) from FO also predicted the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the computer model's DVOA win prediction. The last line in the article, he predicted the Jets to have the #1 pick in the 2014 draft (but only to be different because everyone else said Oakland would have the #1 pick and they'd take Clowney; still, it would seem that he felt the Jets would have the #2 overall pick at best).

So these are FooballOutsiders.com's OWN AUTHORS acknowledging that not only are those numbers not what they thought each team's win total would actually be, but with 32 teams to single out and choose from, 3 out of 11 pinpointed the Jets as the most likely to fall short of the 7.3 wins their model predicted (and listed players as the reason). It means the authors thought that prediction was ridiculous based on the roster they headed into the season with.

Then these same authors took a stab at which teams they felt the computer model underestimated win totals. Zero of them picked the Jets.

You would have to search high & low & cherry-pick the outliers to find people who firmly predicted the Jets would win 7 games this season.

Did they account for two gift of god

Type wins?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Geno the QB of the future? Always easy to say yes after he had a good game. He has thrown a lot of ugly pics this year, but if the Jets FO surround him with good receivers, is he the guy?

To broad a question. Is he the QB of the future? We dont know. Has he shown enough to stay in the conversation? Heck yes. In otherwords, we shouldnt be drafting a QB in the 1st 3 rounds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

False.

 

Sometimes pure stats over-analyze & over-think.  At some point they need to look at the results of their statistical analysis and ask themselves if any season ended the way they're predicting it's going to.  7.3 was the mean wins for the Jets using DVOA on September 4th.  But using DVOA also caused them to predict that no team in the NFL would finish with worse than a 6-10 record or better than an 11-5 record in 2013.  Lowest prediction was Minnesota at 5.7 wins (6-10 record) and Denver with 10.7 wins (11-5).

 

Literally, the stat model predicted that every team in the NFL would finish between 6-10 and 11-5.  That the team with the best regular-season record would finish with only 5 more wins than the team with the worst record.  That was their DVOA prediction, and even the writers on their own website know that was never going to happen.

 

By the way, Scott Kacsmar from FootballOutsiders predicted the Jets would be 3-13.  http://www.footballoutsiders.com/extra-points/2013/kacsmar-and-smiths-predict-2013-nfl-season.  He links to his predictions at the top of paragraph 2.

 

Then here they reference the DVOA-prediction article and the 11 writers predicted who would finish below their 2013 DVOA predictions and why.  Of the 11 writers, 3 of them specifically predicted the Jets' DVOA numbers were the most likely to be overrated.  As in they said their own website's DVOA prediction was faulty.  

 

Ben Muth from FootballOutsiders:  "I just can't see the Gang Green winning more than six games; the only thing worse than the Jets wideouts is the Jets quarterback situation. If I was Rex Ryan I'd rather watch Clemson play too."

 

Mike Ridley from FootballOutsiders (on why he felt the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the website's DVOA win prediction): "Mark Sanchez, Geno Smith, Brady Quinn..."

 

Another (Rob Weintraub) from FO also predicted the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the computer model's DVOA win prediction.  The last line in the article, he predicted the Jets to have the #1 pick in the 2014 draft (but only to be different because everyone else said Oakland would have the #1 pick and they'd take Clowney; still, it would seem that he felt the Jets would have the #2 overall pick at best).

 

So these are FooballOutsiders.com's OWN AUTHORS acknowledging that not only are those numbers not what they thought each team's win total would actually be, but with 32 teams to single out and choose from, 3 out of 11 pinpointed the Jets as the most likely to fall short of the 7.3 wins their model predicted (and listed players as the reason).  It means the authors thought that prediction was ridiculous based on the roster they headed into the season with.

 

Then these same authors took a stab at which teams they felt the computer model underestimated win totals.  Zero of them picked the Jets.

 

 

You would have to search high & low & cherry-pick the outliers to find people who firmly predicted the Jets would win 7 games this season.

How do you do this? I'm gonna have another beer, get some dinner, and root for the majority of JN to get coal in their stockings. Or Bevell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well he's better than Browning Nagle.  But seriously, cannot really judge him completely based on the lack of weapons and work with them.  I would restructure Sanchez and go into next season with Sanchez and Simms to challenge the incumbent  - Geno.  Must add at least three weapons - ideally - Riley Cooper, Brandon Pettigrew and Sammy Watkins add them to Cumberland, Kerley, Hill and Nelson - could be fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did they account for two gift of god

Type wins?

 

Well we all know those were the two most improbable victories in NFL history.  Totally never happens to any other team.  And it only makes it worse because 2 plays are indicative of history that we all are accustomed to, which is that the Jets have routinely been the beneficiaries of the refs being in the tank for them game after game, season after season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

False.

 

Sometimes pure stats over-analyze & over-think.  At some point they need to look at the results of their statistical analysis and ask themselves if any season ended the way they're predicting it's going to.  7.3 was the mean wins for the Jets using DVOA on September 4th.  But using DVOA also caused them to predict that no team in the NFL would finish with worse than a 6-10 record or better than an 11-5 record in 2013.  Lowest prediction was Minnesota at 5.7 wins (6-10 record) and Denver with 10.7 wins (11-5).

 

Literally, the stat model predicted that every team in the NFL would finish between 6-10 and 11-5.  That the team with the best regular-season record would finish with only 5 more wins than the team with the worst record.  That was their DVOA prediction, and even the writers on their own website know that was never going to happen.

 

By the way, Scott Kacsmar from FootballOutsiders predicted the Jets would be 3-13.  http://www.footballoutsiders.com/extra-points/2013/kacsmar-and-smiths-predict-2013-nfl-season.  He links to his predictions at the top of paragraph 2.

 

Then here they reference the DVOA-prediction article and the 11 writers predicted who would finish below their 2013 DVOA predictions and why.  Of the 11 writers, 3 of them specifically predicted the Jets' DVOA numbers were the most likely to be overrated.  As in they said their own website's DVOA prediction was faulty.  

 

Ben Muth from FootballOutsiders:  "I just can't see the Gang Green winning more than six games; the only thing worse than the Jets wideouts is the Jets quarterback situation. If I was Rex Ryan I'd rather watch Clemson play too."

 

Mike Ridley from FootballOutsiders (on why he felt the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the website's DVOA win prediction): "Mark Sanchez, Geno Smith, Brady Quinn..."

 

Another (Rob Weintraub) from FO also predicted the Jets were the most likely team to fall short of the computer model's DVOA win prediction.  The last line in the article, he predicted the Jets to have the #1 pick in the 2014 draft (but only to be different because everyone else said Oakland would have the #1 pick and they'd take Clowney; still, it would seem that he felt the Jets would have the #2 overall pick at best).

 

So these are FooballOutsiders.com's OWN AUTHORS acknowledging that not only are those numbers not what they thought each team's win total would actually be, but with 32 teams to single out and choose from, 3 out of 11 pinpointed the Jets as the most likely to fall short of the 7.3 wins their model predicted (and listed players as the reason).  It means the authors thought that prediction was ridiculous based on the roster they headed into the season with.

 

Then these same authors took a stab at which teams they felt the computer model underestimated win totals.  Zero of them picked the Jets.

 

 

You would have to search high & low & cherry-pick the outliers to find people who firmly predicted the Jets would win 7 games this season.

 

 

You really do live for this stuff. I'm with Slats though, the furthest I'd ever get to compiling that, would be thinking about doing it, which is usually about where it ends. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well we all know those were the two most improbable victories in NFL history. Totally never happens to any other team. And it only makes it worse because 2 plays are indicative of history that we all are accustomed to, which is that the Jets have routinely been the beneficiaries of the refs being in the tank for them game after game, season after season.

Hey, I'm just impressed you can actually make a post that does not involve Sanchez. I did not think that possible. Congrats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...