PromoTheRobot Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 3-7. You don't need Watson the supercomputer to figure out we're not likely making the playoffs. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 If the playoff teams were randomly selected every year this would be true. They are not however and therefore this model is way too simple. Using stats that assume random selection would also likely find the patriots run over the past decade nearly impossible statistically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubs Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 If the playoff teams were randomly selected every year this would be true. They are not however and therefore this model is way too simple. Using stats that assume random selection would also likely find the patriots run over the past decade nearly impossible statistically. Was just going to say the same thing. I think the point that our playoff drought is pathetic and unacceptable and historically bad is completely true. That being said, our chances each year since Brady came into the league is a lot lower. We are almost starting the year with a 2/12 chance to get the wild card (two wild card spots, 12 teams vying for those spots excluding the division winners). That's about a 17% chance per year to make the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 If the playoff teams were randomly selected every year this would be true. They are not however and therefore this model is way too simple. Using stats that assume random selection would also likely find the patriots run over the past decade nearly impossible statistically. no those stats are pretty good for proving a point--considering the economic parity in football. its not the random %s that are the point at all.Its what the factors are which take a very economically fair league---and make some franchises horrible and some good. All it does is prove how awful our mgmt /ownership has been---tyo take such a FAIR league(as opposed to MLB) and still perform so poorly--to make the stats skew so badly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombstone56 Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 whining about the playoffs already..put yourself in the cardinals fan place ,they got to asbowl yeah, but before that it was 1941 when they sniffed the playoffs, they got a cple years now they suck just like before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metzelaars_lives Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 (edited) I'm basically of the belief that the Bills will never reach the playoffs as long as Wilson owns the team, Brandon runs the team, and they are located in Buffalo. This is such a tired response. FWIW, I disagree with you. Right now the Jets are leading the chase for that 6th wild card spot. Do you think we are that far behind the Jets in terms of talent? For that matter, do you think we are that far behind the Chiefs? We are a pretty well-rounded football team except for one thing: WE DON'T HAVE A QUARTERBACK. Which has nothing to do with Ralph Wilson or Russ Brandon or where we play. Hell if we would've signed an Alex Smith, I'm sure we'd be 6-4 or 7-3 right now. I guess what I'm trying to say is that in the AFC in 2013, making the playoffs is not that hard of a proposition. Winning a Super Bowl is another conversation. Edited November 11, 2013 by metzelaars_lives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 whining about the playoffs already..put yourself in the cardinals fan place ,they got to asbowl yeah, but before that it was 1941 when they sniffed the playoffs, they got a cple years now they suck just like before. Comparing the Bills crappy performance to another crappy performance does not make fans happy or justify the Bills lack of success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefenseWinzChampionshipz Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 (Raises hand) Yes defensewinzchampionshipz? Yea ummm, can I use the bathroom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaccof Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 You are slightly off on your math there. 13 years is 0.22% 14 years is 0.14%....or 1 in 720. And your figuring of number of years isn't quite correct either. Ignoring the fact that there were different percent chances in previous years(when there were less teams etc)......that means that each year is the first year in a base 14 year span.....and each base 14 year span has a 0.14% chance to not make the playoffs each year. To figure the chances of this occurring for the Bills throughout their 54 year existence......one first needs to figure the chances that it doesn't happen. There have be 41 x 14 year spans in those 54 years. The chance that a team makes at least one playoff appearance in any 14 year span is 99.86%(1 minus 0.14%). Multiply the .9986 by itself 41 times results in every 14 year span having at least one playoff appearance. This works out to be.....98.7%. That means that the chance that the Bills would have a 14 year span somewhere in there 54 year existence(ignoring past differing percentages as stated earlier) is 1.3% or 1 in 77 chance. That also means that the chance that it occurs league wide in the last 54 years(using 32 teams throughout) is 32 in 77......or 41.55% All this is of course assuming that all things are equal......which i don't believe that they are. IMO it hinges on the chances of not being able to find a decent QB within a 14 year period(along with other factors obviously). I would say that the odds of that happening would be well above 0.14%.......likely closer to 2-3%(at a rough guestimate). Anybody besides me see a good SAT question here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkyMannn Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 time to move on with this years team, who cares what happened before Yeah cause THIS team is so much BETTER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 whining about the playoffs already..put yourself in the cardinals fan place ,they got to asbowl yeah, but before that it was 1941 when they sniffed the playoffs, they got a cple years now they suck just like before. so historically not very good, brief flash of great, and then back to not very good.... hard to relate to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 (edited) no those stats are pretty good for proving a point--considering the economic parity in football. its not the random %s that are the point at all.Its what the factors are which take a very economically fair league---and make some franchises horrible and some good. All it does is prove how awful our mgmt /ownership has been---tyo take such a FAIR league(as opposed to MLB) and still perform so poorly--to make the stats skew so badly. No what it means is the "economic fairness" as you put it isn't as effective at leading to parity. Get a great QB and you are a winner for 1-2 decades. Don't and you won't. There is a tier of teams with a very good QB within which this parity may exist. But a great QB trumps all else and a bad QB is an overriding effect. Next come coaching and GMing which consists of filling the rest of the holes as economically as possible. Since that is the reality, the probability of getting a good to great QB is a huge multiplier when calulating probably of making playoffs... In other words the underlying assumption is that each team has a 12/32 chance to make the playoffs, but reality is if you have a great QB you might have a twice the odds you'll get in vs a no QB team with 1/2 the odds. This means there is a 24/32 chance the pats and broncos get in and a 6/32 chance the bills do. Just throwing numbers out there to elaborate TJ model but I think you see where I am here. Edited November 12, 2013 by over 20 years of fanhood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 (edited) no those stats are pretty good for proving a point--considering the economic parity in football. its not the random %s that are the point at all.Its what the factors are which take a very economically fair league---and make some franchises horrible and some good. All it does is prove how awful our mgmt /ownership has been---tyo take such a FAIR league(as opposed to MLB) and still perform so poorly--to make the stats skew so badly. The stat is random but your point about the Bills organizational failures is right on target. The Bills have had some periods of excellence and I'll put out 4 names that I think are key to those periods: Saban, Knox, Levy, and Polian. Edited November 12, 2013 by All_Pro_Bills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clippers of Nfl Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Math or no math. Science or no science We suck so much that we cant even feel our lips. This makes a great "yo momma" joke btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Avenger Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 60% of the time we make the playoffs every time.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted November 13, 2013 Share Posted November 13, 2013 No what it means is the "economic fairness" as you put it isn't as effective at leading to parity. Get a great QB and you are a winner for 1-2 decades. Don't and you won't. There is a tier of teams with a very good QB within which this parity may exist. But a great QB trumps all else and a bad QB is an overriding effect. Next come coaching and GMing which consists of filling the rest of the holes as economically as possible. Since that is the reality, the probability of getting a good to great QB is a huge multiplier when calulating probably of making playoffs... In other words the underlying assumption is that each team has a 12/32 chance to make the playoffs, but reality is if you have a great QB you might have a twice the odds you'll get in vs a no QB team with 1/2 the odds. This means there is a 24/32 chance the pats and broncos get in and a 6/32 chance the bills do. Just throwing numbers out there to elaborate TJ model but I think you see where I am here. sorry--you are missing my point. you start with the odds from scratch.--and show what they are. Then the actual performance of the teams proves the competency/incompetency of mgmt. You mention having the great QB---well it seems that some organizations had a shot at some very good to potentially great QBs---but end up picking track stars who cant play football. It all goes into the mix. The economic fairness shows that there is an equal chance for a team to do well. Add in the mgmt/owner to the mix and you can gauge--over time--which organizations are incompetent I am not making this into a math equation. My point is just to prove that mgmt is most of it. The SD chargers HAD their QB then some goofball decided Rivers was better. -Someone in the Pats org decided to take a chance on Brady. Its not as much of a luck of the draw as you think. Someone passed on Peyton and picked an unstable goofball at QB.--Starts at the owner then the GM/scouts then the coaches then the players...all tied together--But everything ties back to the owner . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted November 13, 2013 Share Posted November 13, 2013 No 3.5 yet? This place is slipping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted November 13, 2013 Share Posted November 13, 2013 ....The SD chargers HAD their QB then some goofball decided Rivers was better. -Someone in the Pats org decided to take a chance on Brady. Its not as much of a luck of the draw as you think. Someone passed on Peyton and picked an unstable goofball at QB.--Starts at the owner then the GM/scouts then the coaches then the players...all tied together--But everything ties back to the owner . That's not what happened with Brees/Rivers. Brees did nothing with the Chargers for 3 years.......then they had the chance at a top QB prospect so they drafted Rivers......then Brees became really good.....then Brees got injured, had his contract run out and the Chargers were faced with a tonne of money for a star coming off injury while having already committed a tonne of money into Rivers. That's not what happened with Brady. The Pats took a flyer on a 6th round pick who miraculously turned into a superstar. They took a flyer on a 7th the year prior....a 4th 2 years later.....and a 6th the year after that. If they had any faith in Brady they obviously would not have risked waiting till the 6th round to draft him. I don't understand what you meant with Peyton. Nobody passed on him. He was selected #1 overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted November 13, 2013 Share Posted November 13, 2013 (edited) sorry--you are missing my point. you start with the odds from scratch.--and show what they are. Then the actual performance of the teams proves the competency/incompetency of mgmt. You mention having the great QB---well it seems that some organizations had a shot at some very good to potentially great QBs---but end up picking track stars who cant play football. It all goes into the mix. The economic fairness shows that there is an equal chance for a team to do well. Add in the mgmt/owner to the mix and you can gauge--over time--which organizations are incompetent I am not making this into a math equation. My point is just to prove that mgmt is most of it. The SD chargers HAD their QB then some goofball decided Rivers was better. -Someone in the Pats org decided to take a chance on Brady. Its not as much of a luck of the draw as you think. Someone passed on Peyton and picked an unstable goofball at QB.--Starts at the owner then the GM/scouts then the coaches then the players...all tied together--But everything ties back to the owner . Actually You were missing my point. People should not use probability models to assert things when they don't understand how stats work. It's like a weatherman saying well it might rain and it might not, therefore the weather forecast is 50% chance of rain every day forever. But that's not how probability models work so it's a bogus assertion. Didn't anybody take math in middle school or do they frown upon that now? Also BS on management- (yes there is better management which has marginally better probability of succeeding) but no one will ever convince me great management made Tom Brady get picked in the sixth round. Bellicheat was fired in Cleveland. They got lucky and got a surprise HOF QB out of near thin air and the combo of those two clicked.do you think that great NE management is comfortable with what's next if Brady retires? The New Orleans trade for Brees was no different than the phins grabbing Culpepper, Flynn, Palmer, Alex smith, yada yada. No one knew these guys would be who they are the just lucked into it or out of it. Rich Gannon? Kurt Warner? Even Manning could have come back a total train wreck and destroyed Denver it was a risk decision. All people do is make decisions with the best info they have and when it comes to franchise QBs they are wrong more than right.... All of them. Bottom line no parity until you hit the QB jackpot. Edited November 13, 2013 by over 20 years of fanhood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marv Levy Posted November 13, 2013 Share Posted November 13, 2013 You don't need math. It's already a given they will miss. Although this organization has finally started to get better and aggressive they have been absolute dogS hit since Jimbo retired. No sugar coating anything. Total massive failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts