MJS Posted July 3, 2023 Share Posted July 3, 2023 1 minute ago, boater said: Post of the week. So tired of the fans who want to fire Beane and McDermott if they fail to deliver the Lombardi. Have they no memory of the drought? I'll be honest, I don't think the drought should have anything to do with keeping McDermott and Beane. Are they good at their jobs? Do they elevate the team? Do they put the players into position to succeed? Do they offer good leadership, direction, accountability, etc for the team? Are they capable of leading the team to the superbowl? Have they demonstrated the ability to do these things and win games, including playoff games, in the past? Those are the things that should be considered. We can be greatful that they were part of getting the Bills out of the drought, but the drought shouldn't have much of anything to do with measuring their success. I think it would be very foolish to move on from McDermott and Beane right now. That could change in the future, though. Hopefully, they are here for a long, long time and prove all their doubters wrong. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einstein Posted July 3, 2023 Author Share Posted July 3, 2023 6 hours ago, MJS said: Kansas City, the best team in the NFL with the best odds of winning it, has like a 14% chance of winning the superbowl, according to the odds. Odds and probability are not the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsflyer12 Posted July 3, 2023 Share Posted July 3, 2023 (edited) 18 minutes ago, boater said: Post of the week. So tired of the fans who want to fire Beane and McDermott if they fail to deliver the Lombardi. Have they no memory of the drought? I do have a memory, one of losing 4 straight Super Bowls which pain exceeds by a lot the drought. When you tell people you are a Bills fan now, losing 4 straight Super Bowls is ALWAYS mentioned by them, never the drought. My pain, the stain on our team and city doesn’t end till they win a Super Bowl. Being just a playoff team every year and flaming does nothing for many and the Bills historically. Edited July 3, 2023 by Billsflyer12 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boater Posted July 3, 2023 Share Posted July 3, 2023 2 minutes ago, Billsflyer12 said: I do have a memory, one of losing 4 straight Super Bowls which pain exceeds by a lot the drought. When you tell people you are a Bills fan now, losing 4 straight Super Bowls is ALWAYS mentioned by them, never the drought. My pain, the stain on our team and city doesn’t end till they win a Super Bowl. Being just a playoff team every year and flaming does nothing for many and the Bills historically. You have classic PTSD symptoms. Intrusive bad memories, easily brought up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einstein Posted July 3, 2023 Author Share Posted July 3, 2023 9 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said: Or maybe some of us don't b**** and complain on repeat every time we're on this message board. lol. Yes they do. The “some of us” you mention just B word and complain on repeat about other posters who are bitching and complaining. Guess what? At the end of the day, it’s all bitching and complaining. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikie2times Posted July 3, 2023 Share Posted July 3, 2023 5 minutes ago, Einstein said: Odds and probability are not the same. Odds are just an implied probability on an outcome. So yes, they're basically the same thing. Any odd range can be entered into an implied probability calculator. If the outcome occurs more than the implied probability of the odds you will make money long term. If it doesn't you will lose money long term. Here is a calculator https://www.gamingtoday.com/tools/implied-probability/ The Chiefs are currently +650 which is an implied probability of 13.33%. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einstein Posted July 3, 2023 Author Share Posted July 3, 2023 34 minutes ago, Mikie2times said: Odds are just an implied probability on an outcome. So yes, they're basically the same thing. No. Implied probability is not the same as probability. Probability is a measure of the likelihood that a given event will occur. Implied probability is the probability of an event occurring as implied by the odds given on that event. Because implied probability uses the odds given to calculate, it becomes a recursive (or circular). The Chiefs at +650 does not means the Chiefs have a 13.3% probability of winning the Super Bowl. It means that at +650, oddsmakers feel most comfortable hedging bets at the 13.3% mark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikie2times Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 1 hour ago, Einstein said: No. Implied probability is not the same as probability. Probability is a measure of the likelihood that a given event will occur. Implied probability is the probability of an event occurring as implied by the odds given on that event. Because implied probability uses the odds given to calculate, it becomes a recursive (or circular). The Chiefs at +650 does not means the Chiefs have a 13.3% probability of winning the Super Bowl. It means that at +650, oddsmakers feel most comfortable hedging bets at the 13.3% mark. So the vig is what 50 cents on that line in that price range? So the actual probability is +600 or 14.29% or if you want a call the vig a buck, +550 at 15.38%. The book wants to split the take, sure, but if that number doesn't match the actual probability once you account for the vig the book would be exposed. Vegas doesn't think KC has much better of a 15% probability to win it all. If you think they have a 20% probability I would place your wager. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJS Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 3 hours ago, Einstein said: Odds and probability are not the same. Yes, but there aren't any measures of probability to win the Super Bowl. Odds are probably the best we can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royale with Cheese Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 16 hours ago, Einstein said: lol. Yes they do. The “some of us” you mention just B word and complain on repeat about other posters who are bitching and complaining. Guess what? At the end of the day, it’s all bitching and complaining. If this is what you have to tell yourself to feel better. You’re a self admitted scorned fan with massive insecurities….you fit the profile. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einstein Posted July 4, 2023 Author Share Posted July 4, 2023 6 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said: You’re a self admitted scorned fan with massive insecurities….you fit the profile. I love when a reply proves the post it quotes. lol. Bitching about bitching. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
90sBills Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 15 hours ago, Mikie2times said: So the vig is what 50 cents on that line in that price range? So the actual probability is +600 or 14.29% or if you want a call the vig a buck, +550 at 15.38%. The book wants to split the take, sure, but if that number doesn't match the actual probability once you account for the vig the book would be exposed. Vegas doesn't think KC has much better of a 15% probability to win it all. If you think they have a 20% probability I would place your wager. Don’t mean to get in between the discussion with you guys. Just want to point out there’s no juice (vig) when the line is + like this. Almost all future lines are +. They’re sucker bets to begin with so if one has to pay juice it’d be adding insult to injury. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikie2times Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 3 minutes ago, 90sBills said: Don’t mean to get in between the discussion with you guys. Just want to point out there’s no juice (vig) when the line is + like this. Almost all future lines are +. They’re sucker bets to begin with so if one has to pay juice it’d be adding insult to injury. + lines always have Juice, you're paying the tax in reduction of the total payout, not in an additional cost to place the wager to win even money a normal line would be something like -110 vs +100, if the + team had no juice, they would be +110 or +105 depending on how much vig you pay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
90sBills Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 21 minutes ago, Mikie2times said: + lines always have Juice, you're paying the tax in reduction of the total payout, not in an additional cost to place the wager to win even money a normal line would be something like -110 vs +100, if the + team had no juice, they would be +110 or +105 depending on how much vig you pay. -110 line would be -10 juice +100 line would be even money +110 line means you gain +10 The Chiefs winning superbowl line for next season is +650. Meaning you lay $100 to win $650. If you place the $100 bet you’d get $750 back if it hits. There’s no juice. Unless you’re referring to something else. This is just from my experience. Sports wagering is a hobby for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einstein Posted July 4, 2023 Author Share Posted July 4, 2023 1 hour ago, 90sBills said: -110 line would be -10 juice +100 line would be even money +110 line means you gain +10 The Chiefs winning superbowl line for next season is +650. Meaning you lay $100 to win $650. If you place the $100 bet you’d get $750 back if it hits. There’s no juice. Unless you’re referring to something else. This is just from my experience. Sports wagering is a hobby for me. This is correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikie2times Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 2 hours ago, 90sBills said: -110 line would be -10 juice +100 line would be even money +110 line means you gain +10 The Chiefs winning superbowl line for next season is +650. Meaning you lay $100 to win $650. If you place the $100 bet you’d get $750 back if it hits. There’s no juice. Unless you’re referring to something else. This is just from my experience. Sports wagering is a hobby for me. Your examples are correct regarding payouts. But any team that is + money still has “vig” it’s just built into the price. As an example a team that is +100 (bet 100 win 100) will actually have a real probability of between +105 or +110 (you can convert this into a % outcome) 48% or so would be an example. A team with a 48% projected outcome will be priced at around +100. Which means if the outcome is half the time exactly, you still lose money. That is the vig. It’s the price you pay above and beyond the projected true odds and it always occurs ok both sides. Just more transparent on a favorite. 👍 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw66 Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 21 hours ago, Billsflyer12 said: I do have a memory, one of losing 4 straight Super Bowls which pain exceeds by a lot the drought. When you tell people you are a Bills fan now, losing 4 straight Super Bowls is ALWAYS mentioned by them, never the drought. My pain, the stain on our team and city doesn’t end till they win a Super Bowl. Being just a playoff team every year and flaming does nothing for many and the Bills historically. It's this attitude that drives me crazy. As MJS said, the drought has nothing to do with it. And the Super Bowl losses have nothing to do with it. Your personal disappointment has nothing to do with it. Whether the Bills win a Super Bowl has nothing to do with the "many." And history will be what it will be. And I don't believe it, for a minute, when Josh and all these guys say they're objective is to win a Super Bowl for the fans. There's one thing going on here, and only one thing. It's sports competition. It's a team of 60-odd players and 20-odd coaches with a personal burning desire to win a championship. Many of us tried to do that in high school, in one sport or another, and some of us tried to do it in college. Most of us have had the experience at one time or another - trying to win the championship. The Bills are trying to win a Lombardi, one of the toughest championships in the world for a team to win. It takes talent, hard work, determination, guts, and a half dozen other things. It's really difficult. Really difficult. The only thing relevant to the conversation about Beane and McDermott is whether they are the right people to do something that's very difficult to do. That's all. Whether one fan or million want them to win doesn't matter. Whether there is some bad history to be erased, whether it's the drought or the four Super Bowls, or whatever, doesn't matter. And whether no coach has won a Super Bowl after five years of coaching or ten years of coaching doesn't matter. Whether Mike Tomlin won one in his second season doesn't matter. NONE of it matters. All that matters is whether Beane and McDermott are the right people. MJS is correct. 3 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJS Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 1 hour ago, Shaw66 said: It's this attitude that drives me crazy. As MJS said, the drought has nothing to do with it. And the Super Bowl losses have nothing to do with it. Your personal disappointment has nothing to do with it. Whether the Bills win a Super Bowl has nothing to do with the "many." And history will be what it will be. And I don't believe it, for a minute, when Josh and all these guys say they're objective is to win a Super Bowl for the fans. There's one thing going on here, and only one thing. It's sports competition. It's a team of 60-odd players and 20-odd coaches with a personal burning desire to win a championship. Many of us tried to do that in high school, in one sport or another, and some of us tried to do it in college. Most of us have had the experience at one time or another - trying to win the championship. The Bills are trying to win a Lombardi, one of the toughest championships in the world for a team to win. It takes talent, hard work, determination, guts, and a half dozen other things. It's really difficult. Really difficult. The only thing relevant to the conversation about Beane and McDermott is whether they are the right people to do something that's very difficult to do. That's all. Whether one fan or million want them to win doesn't matter. Whether there is some bad history to be erased, whether it's the drought or the four Super Bowls, or whatever, doesn't matter. And whether no coach has won a Super Bowl after five years of coaching or ten years of coaching doesn't matter. Whether Mike Tomlin won one in his second season doesn't matter. NONE of it matters. All that matters is whether Beane and McDermott are the right people. MJS is correct. I'll say this: that first year of McDermott coming in and rallying a talent deficient team and getting them to the playoffs speaks volumes about his ability as a coach and leader to me, and it is one of the reasons I have faith in him. I think the fact that he did it with a franchise with such a long history of futility does add to what he did and should be considered as part of his resume of achievement. But saying "we can't change coaches because times are better now than they were when we were a historic laughing stock during the drought" is not a good argument. Not being terrible is not a good enough reason to keep him. I think there is plenty of evidence in favor of McDermott and Beane to speak to. The drought is not a part of that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T master Posted July 7, 2023 Share Posted July 7, 2023 (edited) I guess you would have to lump all of those coaches that have won a Super Bowl & average out how many years it took each of them to get to the big game and win it . That being said i'm not positive that that thinking would be correct way to figure it out . But with that being said i hope McD is here until he doesn't want to be here because then there would be a stability like the Steelers have had for years to come & the Bills would be contenders every year . Some say he needs to be gotten rid of right now that to me is foolish to go back to what the Bills were doing before he came here & turned the ship around . One thing they seem to forget is that in the grand scheme of things he's still a very young HC & seems to learn from his mistakes so i'm hoping it won't take long for the learning process to bring the Bills a Lombardy !! GO BILLS !!! Edited July 7, 2023 by T master Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsflyer12 Posted July 8, 2023 Share Posted July 8, 2023 4 hours ago, T master said: I guess you would have to lump all of those coaches that have won a Super Bowl & average out how many years it took each of them to get to the big game and win it . That being said i'm not positive that that thinking would be correct way to figure it out . But with that being said i hope McD is here until he doesn't want to be here because then there would be a stability like the Steelers have had for years to come & the Bills would be contenders every year . Some say he needs to be gotten rid of right now that to me is foolish to go back to what the Bills were doing before he came here & turned the ship around . One thing they seem to forget is that in the grand scheme of things he's still a very young HC & seems to learn from his mistakes so i'm hoping it won't take long for the learning process to bring the Bills a Lombardy !! GO BILLS !!! It’s been posted before in a number of threads, John Madden in 1974 is the only head coach to make his 1st Super Bowl appearance after his 7th year. John did it in his 8th season. Tom Landry made his 1st Championship game appearance in his 7th year. So other then the 2 all head coaches have made their 1st Super Bowl appearance in less time then McD has coached the Bills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T master Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 On 7/7/2023 at 5:16 PM, Billsflyer12 said: It’s been posted before in a number of threads, John Madden in 1974 is the only head coach to make his 1st Super Bowl appearance after his 7th year. John did it in his 8th season. Tom Landry made his 1st Championship game appearance in his 7th year. So other then the 2 all head coaches have made their 1st Super Bowl appearance in less time then McD has coached the Bills. So is this to be taken as you are one that wants the Bills to move on from McD's success & just start over with a entire new coaching staff ? The reason why i ask is because remember what happened when the Pegs brought in Rex a fairly successful coach and he changed the number 1 - 4/3 D to a 3/4 and destroyed the team chemistry . I may be wrong but i would rather have a continually successful team & the stability than the change because if you are in the hunt you always have a shot . But if your on the outside looking in theres never going to be a chance . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoMAn Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 On 6/24/2023 at 4:56 PM, notwoz said: Boy, you make pretty charts. Can you turn this into a Powerpoint presentation? Now that would be truly enervating. I have a reasonably good vocabulary, but wasn’t familiar with that word. After learning it’s meaning, I’m amazed it’s not more commonly used. Thanks for the enlightenment! Yes, a PowerPoint presentation would be a useful tool to help us understand why McDermott should go, but maybe more importantly, who the replacement should be. 🙄 The statistics are ridiculously one-sided. A more balanced view might include how many years those rapidly ascending coaches went without getting to a Super Bowl after being there early in their careers. Tomlin, Payton, Carroll, etc. The great Don Shula-how many consecutive years did he lead without getting there? Considered one of the all-time best coaches, yet he went 25+ years after ‘74 not winning the big game. Loser! Can we get a pie chart illustrating the collective below-average IQ of the ‘fire McDermott’ throng? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsflyer12 Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 (edited) 8 hours ago, T master said: So is this to be taken as you are one that wants the Bills to move on from McD's success & just start over with a entire new coaching staff ? The reason why i ask is because remember what happened when the Pegs brought in Rex a fairly successful coach and he changed the number 1 - 4/3 D to a 3/4 and destroyed the team chemistry . I may be wrong but i would rather have a continually successful team & the stability than the change because if you are in the hunt you always have a shot . But if you’re on the outside looking in theres never going to be a chance . For starters the only perspective that matters on this is the Pegulas, and they have clearly made their feelings on this topic clear. They want “sustained success” and as a business family that brings consistent profits. For small market Buffalo this is probably a huge deal for team stability, viability and likely played huge roll in getting the new stadium. You have a fair perspective and one many if not most currently have about McD. I’ve asked before on here if fans would rather have 5 years of playoffs and 1 SB win or 10 straight years of playoffs and no SB win. Sounds like you along with many other great Bills fans would rather have stability and constant long term winning, even if that means no SB win. For me and some other fans it’s really about winning a SB, even if the winning may be on a shorter cycle. For fans like us the pain of 4 straight Super Bowl losses is 1000% worse than the drought. So with our perspective the scrutiny of the GM, Coach and QB will feel more intense and urgent. McD is a very good coach, and is likely and very good man. This is not personal. Nevertheless, I would never bet any sum of money on McD to even make a SB appearance let alone winning one. There is a lot of historical data, performance stats and current trends saying for that to be the case. I and others have posted all this information before, I won’t do it again. Does this mean he can’t? No, of course he certainly can. Yet, he would literally be the 1st or be one of extremely few in NFL history to win a SB based on many of these stats and trends. To answer your question specifically, I wish we had a different coach and I would have likely fired him after 13 seconds. I don’t want to waste Josh Allens prime knowing almost all the data says he won’t be the coach to actually win the Super Bowl with the Bills. But, I acknowledge to my ultimate frustration that what I feels means absolutely nothing. So me and my family will be there every Sunday this fall watching and still hoping that McD proves me and the data wrong. Sorry for long post, wishing you and everyone on the board good health and a great life. Edited July 9, 2023 by Billsflyer12 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nextmanup Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 9 hours ago, T master said: So is this to be taken as you are one that wants the Bills to move on from McD's success & just start over with a entire new coaching staff ? The reason why i ask is because remember what happened when the Pegs brought in Rex a fairly successful coach and he changed the number 1 - 4/3 D to a 3/4 and destroyed the team chemistry . I may be wrong but i would rather have a continually successful team & the stability than the change because if you are in the hunt you always have a shot . But if your on the outside looking in theres never going to be a chance . Are you a pessimist by nature? Why do you assume that if we move on from McDermott we will replace him with a clown show? What if we replace him with a coach at least as organized as McDermott, but who is a much better tactician for in-game instant decision making, and we go to the SB in his first season? What will your war cry be then? How do you know we're getting Rex and not my example? Why fear the worst? I can assure you Sean McDermott is not the only guy who can get a bunch of idiot athletes together on the same page, motivated, and organized...which is what he excels at. The in game field marshaling is not for him. He's terrible at it. 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sammy Watkins' Rib Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 1 hour ago, Billsflyer12 said: There is a lot of historical data, performance stats and current trends saying for that to be the case. Good post. The historical data piling up against McD is alarming. The thing is, it is 100% team owner influenced. I do believe McD has landed in the perfect spot where he will get the Andy Reid Philly Eagles treatment in that he will be given a very long leash to try and get over the hump. Reid never did with Philly but there is no denying he is a great coach and had Reid stayed I am willing to bet they eventually would have won a Super Bowl with him in Philly. Reid was in Philly for 14 seasons. So we might have another 7 years of McDermott, Super Bowl or no Super Bowl. But yes, the vast majority of coaches will be fired if they don't win a Super Bowl within their first 5-10 years with a team. That's just the owner's impatience. I THINK Peugla will have extreme patience, but you never know. Of course, a consecutive season missing the playoffs would really change everything. I wonder how long the average non super bowl winning head coaches' career with one team is? Probably something like 2.8 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, Billsflyer12 said: For starters the only perspective that matters on this is the Pegulas, and they have clearly made their feelings on this topic clear. They want “sustained success” and as a business family that brings consistent profits. For small market Buffalo this is probably a huge deal for team stability, viability and likely played huge roll in getting the new stadium. You have a fair perspective and one many if not most currently have about McD. I’ve asked before on here if fans would rather have 5 years of playoffs and 1 SB win or 10 straight years of playoffs and no SB win. Sounds like you along with many other great Bills fans would rather have stability and constant long term winning, even if that means no SB win. For me and some other fans it’s really about winning a SB, even if the winning may be on a shorter cycle. For fans like us the pain of 4 straight Super Bowl losses is 1000% worse than the drought. So with our perspective the scrutiny of the GM, Coach and QB will feel more intense and urgent. McD is a very good coach, and is likely and very good man. This is not personal. Nevertheless, I would never bet any sum of money on McD to even make a SB appearance let alone winning one. There is a lot of historical data, performance stats and current trends saying for that to be the case. I and others have posted all this information before, I won’t do it again. Does this mean he can’t? No, of course he certainly can. Yet, he would literally be the 1st or be one of extremely few in NFL history to win a SB based on many of these stats and trends. To answer your question specifically, I wish we had a different coach and I would have likely fired him after 13 seconds. I don’t want to waste Josh Allens prime knowing almost all the data says he won’t be the coach to actually win the Super Bowl with the Bills. But, I acknowledge to my ultimate frustration that what I feels means absolutely nothing. So me and my family will be there every Sunday this fall watching and still hoping that McD proves me and the data wrong. Sorry for long post, wishing you and everyone on the board good health and a great life. The issue is that winning a single football game is multi factorial. The number of variables that goes into winning a single game, let alone a SB, are immense. Simply taking one piece of historical data and trying to wedge it into a prediction isn’t really valid because it does not take into account all the variables that can impact the end point of the analysis. Edited July 9, 2023 by oldmanfan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsflyer12 Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 (edited) 18 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: The issue is that winning a single football game is multi factorial. The number of variables that goes into winning a single game, let alone a SB, are immense. Simply taking one piece of historical data and trying to wedge it into a prediction isn’t really valid because it does not take into account all the variables that can impact of the end point of the analysis. I can appreciate you thoughts on this topic, and you not alone in your thinking. Yet, its not just one piece of historical data, it’s a lot of pieces. These pieces aren't just little ones taken out of context and twisted for a narrative. They are simple, large pieces of information many of which have almost 60 years of longevity. No piece of data or statistics is 100% certain of a specific outcome, there is always variables, exceptions and outliers. They are tools that help us make predictions on the probability or likelihood of events happening or not. The many pieces of data, along with the on field results make the probability of SB appearance and victory by McD extremely small. Can he overcome these very small odds, yes. I and many others no longer wish to bet the prime of Josh Allen’s window thinking McD will overcome his shortfalls as a coach and the history that says he is unlikely to get the biggest prize. As I’ve said, I hope he proves me and the data wrong. Thanks you the debate, hope you are well. Edited July 9, 2023 by Billsflyer12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 3 hours ago, Nextmanup said: The in game field marshaling is not for him. He's terrible at it. Except the data does not support that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 (edited) 4 hours ago, Billsflyer12 said: I can appreciate you thoughts on this topic, and you not alone in your thinking. Yet, its not just one piece of historical data, it’s a lot of pieces. These pieces aren't just little ones taken out of context and twisted for a narrative. They are simple, large pieces of information many of which have almost 60 years of longevity. No piece of data or statistics is 100% certain of a specific outcome, there is always variables, exceptions and outliers. They are tools that help us make predictions on the probability or likelihood of events happening or not. The many pieces of data, along with the on field results make the probability of SB appearance and victory by McD extremely small. Can he overcome these very small odds, yes. I and many others no longer wish to bet the prime of Josh Allen’s window thinking McD will overcome his shortfalls as a coach and the history that says he is unlikely to get the biggest prize. As I’ve said, I hope he proves me and the data wrong. Thanks you the debate, hope you are well. The OP relied on a single variable. What other data would you point to? And why would you choose that specific endpoint? For me it is not just getting to a SB, I’d choose winning one since that to me is the only real goal of an NFL team. And using that, it took Reid over twenty years I believe. Belichick around 15. And so on. Edited July 9, 2023 by oldmanfan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
folz Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 On 7/7/2023 at 8:16 PM, Billsflyer12 said: It’s been posted before in a number of threads, John Madden in 1974 is the only head coach to make his 1st Super Bowl appearance after his 7th year. John did it in his 8th season. Tom Landry made his 1st Championship game appearance in his 7th year. So other then the 2 all head coaches have made their 1st Super Bowl appearance in less time then McD has coached the Bills. Dude, if you are going to argue a point with examples, maybe you should at least look up those examples to see if they are correct first (verify your information). And I find it interesting that early in this thread it was all about how long it took a coach to WIN a Super Bowl, and once it was shown that like 40% of Super Bowl coaches didn't win their first Super Bowl in 6 years, then the bar lowered to how long it took a coach to APPEAR in a Super Bowl. Yet if McD APPEARED in a Super Bowl and LOST, none of the McD detractors would be happy with that, they would be calling for his head for losing the Super Bowl. So, to lower the bar for your argument, but not for Sean, shows that you are grasping at straws. But, you should at least try and get your arguments correct and not just make stuff up. Here is some data I posted earlier in this thread (obviously you haven't read the whole thread): Coach Years to 1st SB appearance Years to 1st Super Bowl victory Tom Landry 11 12 Bill Belichick 7 7 Andy Reid 6 21 Tom Coughlin 12 12 Pete Carroll 8 8 Chuck Noll 6 6 Bill Cowher 4 14 Tony Dungy 11 11 Dick Vermeil 5 10 John Madden 8 8 Gary Kubiak 9 9 Bruce Arians 8 8 I see seven coaches (not just Madden) who didn't appear in a Super Bowl until after their 7th season (and please check and verify my list). And its hard to use Tom Landry as an example because he coached for 6 years before the Super Bowl existed. So, while he did win Super Bowl #6, you can't count that as his 6th year when he had actually been a head coach for 12 years already. And if you say, well he probably would have done it earlier if Super Bowls existed earlier in his career, I would counter with his win/loss record of his first 6 years (25-53). And using the fact that he made a Championship game in his 7th year, is a bit misleading as well because it was an NFL championship game in the first year of the Super Bowl, that Dallas lost to Green Bay. Green Bay would go on to play and beat the AFL Champion KC Chiefs in Super Bowl I. So, that Championship game, was more like the first NFC championship (not a Super Bowl). Also, there were only 15 NFL teams in 1966 (pre-merger) when Landry made that Championship game. A lot easier to make a Championship game (not even a SB) with 15 teams, rather than 32 teams. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 8 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: The OP relied on a single variable. What other data would you point to? And why would you choose that specific endpoint? For me it is not just getting to a SB, I’d choose winning one since that yo me is the only real goal of an NFL team. And using that, it took Reid over twenty years I believe. Belichick around 15. And so on. The point is it happens almost immediately after they get their guy at QB You should look at it from the team's perspective imo and not the coach's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 18 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: The point is it happens almost immediately after they get their guy at QB You should look at it from the team's perspective imo and not the coach's I agree one should look from a team perspective. You need to convince the guy who started this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 7 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: I agree one should look from a team perspective. You need to convince the guy who started this thread. I mean it doesn't do us any good to say well, it took Reid 21 years because that was with another team. If McDermott wins a Super Bowl after 15 years w a different franchise that would be meaningless for the Bills Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 (edited) 33 minutes ago, folz said: Dude, if you are going to argue a point with examples, maybe you should at least look up those examples to see if they are correct first (verify your information). And I find it interesting that early in this thread it was all about how long it took a coach to WIN a Super Bowl, and once it was shown that like 40% of Super Bowl coaches didn't win their first Super Bowl in 6 years, then the bar lowered to how long it took a coach to APPEAR in a Super Bowl. Yet if McD APPEARED in a Super Bowl and LOST, none of the McD detractors would be happy with that, they would be calling for his head for losing the Super Bowl. So, to lower the bar for your argument, but not for Sean, shows that you are grasping at straws. But, you should at least try and get your arguments correct and not just make stuff up. Here is some data I posted earlier in this thread (obviously you haven't read the whole thread): Coach Years to 1st SB appearance Years to 1st Super Bowl victory Tom Landry 11 12 Bill Belichick 7 7 Andy Reid 6 21 Tom Coughlin 12 12 Pete Carroll 8 8 Chuck Noll 6 6 Bill Cowher 4 14 Tony Dungy 11 11 Dick Vermeil 5 10 John Madden 8 8 Gary Kubiak 9 9 Bruce Arians 8 8 I see seven coaches (not just Madden) who didn't appear in a Super Bowl until after their 7th season (and please check and verify my list). And its hard to use Tom Landry as an example because he coached for 6 years before the Super Bowl existed. So, while he did win Super Bowl #6, you can't count that as his 6th year when he had actually been a head coach for 12 years already. And if you say, well he probably would have done it earlier if Super Bowls existed earlier in his career, I would counter with his win/loss record of his first 6 years (25-53). And using the fact that he made a Championship game in his 7th year, is a bit misleading as well because it was an NFL championship game in the first year of the Super Bowl, that Dallas lost to Green Bay. Green Bay would go on to play and beat the AFL Champion KC Chiefs in Super Bowl I. So, that Championship game, was more like the first NFC championship (not a Super Bowl). Also, there were only 15 NFL teams in 1966 (pre-merger) when Landry made that Championship game. A lot easier to make a Championship game (not even a SB) with 15 teams, rather than 32 teams. I am quoting this….just because I can! 😋 . 12 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: I agree one should look from a team perspective. You need to convince the guy who started this thread. BUT, if you look at it from a team perspective it kind of dilutes “the HC must go!!!” message intended to be sent. Life is not that simple. . Edited July 9, 2023 by Augie 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 2 minutes ago, Augie said: I am quoting this….just because I can! 😋 . Have you read this from 538 https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-coaches-and-qbs-should-divorce-after-five-years-of-not-winning/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsflyer12 Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 (edited) 40 minutes ago, folz said: Dude, if you are going to argue a point with examples, maybe you should at least look up those examples to see if they are correct first (verify your information). And I find it interesting that early in this thread it was all about how long it took a coach to WIN a Super Bowl, and once it was shown that like 40% of Super Bowl coaches didn't win their first Super Bowl in 6 years, then the bar lowered to how long it took a coach to APPEAR in a Super Bowl. Yet if McD APPEARED in a Super Bowl and LOST, none of the McD detractors would be happy with that, they would be calling for his head for losing the Super Bowl. So, to lower the bar for your argument, but not for Sean, shows that you are grasping at straws. But, you should at least try and get your arguments correct and not just make stuff up. Here is some data I posted earlier in this thread (obviously you haven't read the whole thread): Coach Years to 1st SB appearance Years to 1st Super Bowl victory Tom Landry 11 12 Bill Belichick 7 7 Andy Reid 6 21 Tom Coughlin 12 12 Pete Carroll 8 8 Chuck Noll 6 6 Bill Cowher 4 14 Tony Dungy 11 11 Dick Vermeil 5 10 John Madden 8 8 Gary Kubiak 9 9 Bruce Arians 8 8 I see seven coaches (not just Madden) who didn't appear in a Super Bowl until after their 7th season (and please check and verify my list). And its hard to use Tom Landry as an example because he coached for 6 years before the Super Bowl existed. So, while he did win Super Bowl #6, you can't count that as his 6th year when he had actually been a head coach for 12 years already. And if you say, well he probably would have done it earlier if Super Bowls existed earlier in his career, I would counter with his win/loss record of his first 6 years (25-53). And using the fact that he made a Championship game in his 7th year, is a bit misleading as well because it was an NFL championship game in the first year of the Super Bowl, that Dallas lost to Green Bay. Green Bay would go on to play and beat the AFL Champion KC Chiefs in Super Bowl I. So, that Championship game, was more like the first NFC championship (not a Super Bowl). Also, there were only 15 NFL teams in 1966 (pre-merger) when Landry made that Championship game. A lot easier to make a Championship game (not even a SB) with 15 teams, rather than 32 teams. Sorry left out an important detail for my stats on that specific post, 7th season with his FIRST team, I have mentioned it a couple of times in other posts of mine but left it out with this recent one. My apologies. John Madden was only NFL head coach to make the Super Bowl beyond his 7th year with his 1st team as coach. For Tom Landry, you either use the NFL Championship Game and the years before or you don’t, can’t have it both ways. If you don’t count the NFL Championship game because it was pre Super Bowl the he made Super in year 6, if you do count it then he made it in year 7. All others on your good table made their 1st appearance beyond 7th year with team #2 or more. I have listed in detail all the stats and data for my argument before in detail, some with reference articles. You can look them up on my profile if you want. I don’t need to keep posting them. Sorry for leaving the important detail out of my most recent post. Hope you are well. Edited July 9, 2023 by Billsflyer12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 This isn’t a math problem, though the formulas were amusing. It will happen, or it won’t. The past does not answer any questions about our future. There might be a coincidence, but that’s all it would be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 32 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: I mean it doesn't do us any good to say well, it took Reid 21 years because that was with another team. If McDermott wins a Super Bowl after 15 years w a different franchise that would be meaningless for the Bills It remains a multi factorial process regardless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
folz Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 8 minutes ago, Billsflyer12 said: Sorry left out an important detail for my stats on that specific post, 7th season with his FIRST team, I have mentioned it a couple of times in other posts of mine but left it out with this recent one. My apologies. John Madden was only NFL head coach to make the Super Bowl beyond his 7th year with his 1st team as coach. For Tom Landry, you either use the NFL Championship Game and the years before or you don’t, can’t have it both ways. If you don’t count the NFL Championship game because it was pre Super Bowl the he made Super in year 6, if you do count it then he made it in year 7. All others on your good table made their 1st appearance beyond 7th year with team #2 or more. I have listed in detail all the stats and data for my argument before in detail, some with reference articles. You can look them up on my profile if you want. I don’t need to keep posting them. Sorry for leaving the important detail out of my most recent post. Hope you are well. 👍 Fair enough. And yes, with Landry, it's fair to take him off my list (as an outlier---due to coaching 6 years prior to SBs). But you definitely can't equate him going to and losing an NFL Championship (in a 15-team league, the same year as SBI) the same as going to a Super Bowl. The Super Bowl actually existed that year and Landry wasn't in it. So, I'm fine taking him out of the discussion altogether on both sides. I don't know...it just seems in these discussions that the bar keeps getting set higher and higher for McDermott. The only coach who didn't win appear in a Super Bowl in 5 6 7 8 seasons, with the same team, with a top QB for more than 5 years (no discussion of how raw that QB was), when the president was a democrat, and Mercury was in retrograde. I know, I'm being a bit over the top there, but it just seems that the more variables get added, the less useful the stat is in showing any kind of true trend or to be used as any type of predictor. Look, we're all Bills fans. We all want a Super Bowl. We differ on our feelings about our head coach getting us there. It's all good. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steptide Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 I'm watching a replay of the first dallas/bills superbowl on nfl network right now. Down 31-10, Marv punts on 4th down from the 45 yard line, Dallas returns 30 yards for a 15 total yard punt. Pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.