pgitta Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 As it is, the numbers don't quite add up. Do you know what those numbers represent? Could there be some rankings that were excluded? They represent the offensiv and defensive rankings of the teams listed against NFC opponents. But you are correct in stating that they don't mean anything, since your team didn't play hardly anyone with a winning record. So the results are skewed. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 And during this AMAZING run to the playoffs you beat-AZ, St. Louis(with a 3rd string QB), Giants, Cowgirls, Philly(with a High School QB). Seems we played(and beat) all those teams...but OUR schedule was weak? strength of shedule is an indisputable number. why would you even attempt to debate this? are you insane? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinFan63 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Ok.... My mom's foot IS purple and getting VERY dry and flaky. This is a GREAT sign for us. No sign of thick black hair on her back, so we look to be in good shape for the game Saturday. Hail!:point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I don't see how the Skins D-Line can be ranked #11 against the run and #23 against the pass, especially given that our defense as a whole is ranked #2! I was also very surprised to see Seattle's D-Line ranked #1 against the run given that their defense ranks in the middle of the pack. Any insights? agreed. i am lost on that one. how do the skins give up less than 82 rush yards a game (#1- by a long shot- since december, i might add- and this thing is supposed to be weighted for recent games) and get ranked 11th??? that HAS to be a typo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lefty420 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 all u seahawk fans all i will say is strength of schedule redskins .539 rank 2nd seahwaks .430 rank dead last now lets look at something ebtter how bout strength of victory. if u don;t know what thats is its the avg of the teams u beat not just who u played redskins .500 rank #1 seahawks .404 rank 28th so u only beat the bottom of the league while we had to play the best teams. infact the seahawks only beat 1 playoff team this year if u don;t count indy as they were resting players and u guys were trying to get a record also the seahawks have not even won a playoff game yet. all i can say is don;t open ur mouth till u have proved ur worth. ur team has not been tested. is that ur fault no. but i know what the skins can do vs good teams. right now u have no clue what ur team can do. so please run ur mouth. just like hassleback in the playoff 2 years ago. it will come back to bite u in the behind. we come to play, we aint scared, and we know what we can do. we have the experience, the rings and we have WON a playoff game the last 21 years. in fact we have won a few also the last time u were home with a first round bye u got beAT handily. do not open ur mouth. u have done nothing. now if u beat us good jopb i will congratulate u but to come to my board like u ahve won the superbowl with out a playoff victory when we have already beaten u this year is just crazy. thats right we have beaten u already. when u see that 13-3 we gave u one of the 3. regardelss of how we did it, just like regardless on how u beat the giants. u lost. if we win by 3 in ot on saturday do u think iwill care how we did it. do u think i care we only had 120 yards of offense last week. hell no. u know why. because we won. winning is the only language i speak so tell me when was the last time the seahawks beat the skins or joe gibbs? how bout holmgren, when was the last time he beat gibbs? whats that never ur damn right REMEBR WE ALREADY BEAT U. WE HAVE AND CAN DO IT AGAIN. DON;T GET ****Y. IT DOES NOT SUIT U. WIN A CHAMPIONSHIP IN ANY SPORT THAN COME BACK AND TALK TO ME Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daklu Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 They represent the offensiv and defensive rankings of the teams listed against NFC opponents.I was specifically referring to large, unlabelled numbers at the bottom of the chart. It lists Seattle - 80, Washington - 80, Tampa Bay - 83, Chicago - 101, and Carolina - 83. Do you happen to know specifically what those numbers represent? Do you have a link to that table or can you send a copy of the spreadsheet?But you are correct in stating that they don't mean anything, since your team didn't play hardly anyone with a winning record.You're barking up the wrong tree here. Not only do I agree that the Seahawks had an easy schedule, but there are other, much more basic reasons why the data is essentially meaningless.1. You chose to include a subset of the data rather than all the data. Conveniently, the four games you excluded (against the AFC West) are four games the Redskins lost. 2. Ordinal data (putting the data in ranked order) is very deceptive because it gives no information as to the relative differences between each ranking. Someone on another thread pointed out that the difference in yards per game between the #5 ranked offense and the #17 ranked offense is ~30 yards. Clearly, there is much less difference between the #5 team and the #17 team than the rankings would indicate. 3. While looking at rankings can be interesting, summing ordinal data (if that is indeed what is happening at the bottom of each column) is just flat out wrong. It is so wrong with this particular data set that I don't even know where to begin... 4. Assuming again that the data has been summed at the bottom of each column, the data has been double and triple dipped. For example, the Total Offense ranking (as far as the NFL is concerned) is determined by adding the total passing yards to the total running yards. Therefore, the data from a single run is being included not only in the Rushing category, but in the Total Offense category. (Double dipping) A single pass completion adds to the Total Offense, Passing, and Receiving category. (Triple dipping) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daklu Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 REMEBR WE ALREADY BEAT U. WE HAVE AND CAN DO IT AGAIN. DON;T GET ****Y. IT DOES NOT SUIT U. WIN A CHAMPIONSHIP IN ANY SPORT THAN COME BACK AND TALK TO MEFYI, Sonics won the NBA Championship in '79. Washington Huskies football won the National Championship in 91. Huskies women's volleyball won the National Championship this year. I think the women's softball team won the National Championship too, but I'm not certain.Don't get mad... you did say any sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lefty420 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 FYI, Sonics won the NBA Championship in '79. Washington Huskies football won the National Championship in 91. Huskies women's volleyball won the National Championship this year. I think the women's softball team won the National Championship too, but I'm not certain.Don't get mad... you did say any sport. LOL. THATS IT. 1 PRO TITTLE. LOL I THOUGHT U HAD ATLEAST 2 LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rigelian Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Face it folks there are no objective analysis. There are statistical analyses all over the place, but when one compiles overall rankings, it's heavily biased by what statistics people put weight on. At this point about all people can do is push stats and counter stats and there you go over and over the same territory with nothing really new being revealed. Probably the best thing in my opinion is hearing how the teams play in certain situations. How do they game plan, where do they go when they're under pressure, what vulnerabilities do each team expose. Quite frankly, Seahawks fans, at least the more rational ones, are probably better at identifying the Seahawks weaknesses than Redskin fans. Redskin fans are probably better at exposing the weaknesses of their own teams as well. The same about the teams strengths. The problem is that no one really has much incentive to do this in fan forums. So honest analysis doesn't seem to predominate but gets pushed out by the cheerleader aspect. I've watched the redskins in two and a half games this year. The Seahawks game, the Tampa Bay game and they're amazing come back against the Dallas Cowboys. (I hate the Cowboys -- so that game made me very very happy). In none of those games did you offense impress me. The game that was the best was against the Seahawks...but only on 3rd and long. But here's the thing. I also know from reading that the Redskins have had some very productive games, but not having watched how they did it there is a huge area missing from my analysis. In the reverse I'm sure the same can be said for most redskins fans. I doubt that very many of you have watched the Seahawks all year long. I know this from hearing people say that all you have to do is stop Alexander. Listen folks if game history is any guide, to stop Alexander you have to stop the Seahawks short ball control passing game. That short passing game if it's on, makes it difficult to stop Alexander becuase you stop Alexander by blitzing the running lane. Alexander and the Seahawk passing game or symbiotic...which is why the whole notion of saying we just have to stop Alexander makes little sense. So tell me if you can, when the Redskins are working in sync, when they're on their game...how do they do it? I know they have a reputation of blitzing on defense, but how does your offense do it? In the first game against the Seahawks you did it on 3rd and long passes. Can you do that consistently. I'm curious. Rigelian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgitta Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 2. Ordinal data (putting the data in ranked order) is very deceptive because it gives no information as to the relative differences between each ranking. Someone on another thread pointed out that the difference in yards per game between the #5 ranked offense and the #17 ranked offense is ~30 yards. Clearly, there is much less difference between the #5 team and the #17 team than the rankings would indicate. 3. While looking at rankings can be interesting, summing ordinal data (if that is indeed what is happening at the bottom of each column) is just flat out wrong. It is so wrong with this particular data set that I don't even know where to begin... 4. Assuming again that the data has been summed at the bottom of each column, the data has been double and triple dipped. For example, the Total Offense ranking (as far as the NFL is concerned) is determined by adding the total passing yards to the total running yards. Therefore, the data from a single run is being included not only in the Rushing category, but in the Total Offense category. (Double dipping) A single pass completion adds to the Total Offense, Passing, and Receiving category. (Triple dipping) Oh please. There is no smoke and mirrors going on there. I filtered it for NFC because were talking NFC teams here. And I don't agree that summing rankings is not a indication of RELATIVE strengths and weaknesses. If I had included the AFC, it would not have been all that different. Anyway, it matters not. We all know how football is. The 49ers could beat Indy in the Superbowl. Anything can happen, and heart oftens means more than ability. Ok, well maybe not SF., but well, even YOU guys can win a game here and there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotomacSkinsFan Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 And during this AMAZING run to the playoffs you beat-AZ, St. Louis(with a 3rd string QB), Giants, Cowgirls, Philly(with a High School QB). Seems we played(and beat) all those teams...but OUR schedule was weak? this is like the fifth time youve posted this exact same thing. Didnt i tell you to shut up already. You keep pointing out that our 5 game streak isn't impressive because the teams werent that great, and that's why we made the playoffs. A shedule has sixteen games. we played 11 playoff teams this year. You played 3. this guy sums it up nicely: Sorry I know most of you know this already, but a friend asked me to post some research I did when I found out we were playing the seaducks...this isn't copied form any piblication, but the facts sre triple checked. Seattle Record.........................................Opponents Season Result at Jacksonville (12-4) L 26-14..............................Playoffs, Lost to NE Atlanta (8-8) W 21-18........................................Did not make playoffs Arizona (5-11) W 37-12.......................................Did not make playoffs at Washington (11-5) L 20-17...............................Playoffs, Won at Tampa at St Louis (6-10) W 37-31...................................Did not make playoffs Houston (4-12) W 42-10.......................................Did not make playoffs Dallas (9-7) W 13-10..........................................Did not make playoffs at Arizona (5-11) W 33-19...................................Did not make playoffs St Louis (6-10) W 31-16.......................................Did not make playoffs at San Francisco (4-12) W 27-25...........................Did not make playoffs New York Giants (12-4)W 24-21...........................Did not score a point in playoffs at Philadelphia (6-10) W 42-0................................Did not make playoffs San Francisco (4-12) W 41-3.................................Did not make playoffs Tennessee (4-12) W 28-24....................................Did not make playoffs Indianapolis (12-4) W 28-13..................................Playoffs at Green Bay (4-12) L 23-17.......................................Did not make playoffs Opponents Total………………………………………….112-144 Games vs. Play-Off Opponents………………………….3 Wins vs. Play-Off Opponents……………………………1 Games vs. teams w/ winning Records..............................5 Washington Record.........................................Opponents Season Result vs. Bears (11-5) W 9 - 7..................................Playoffs @ Cowboys (9-7) W 14 - 13..................................Did not Make Playoffs vs. Seahawks (13-3) W 20 - 17 ..................................Playoffs @ Broncos (13-3) L 19 - 21..................................Playoffs @ Chiefs (10-6) L 21 - 28..................................Did not Make Playoffs vs. 49ers (4-12) W 52 - 17..................................Did not Make Playoffs @ Giants (12-4) L 0 - 36..................................Playoffs Eagles (6-10) W 17 - 10..................................Did not Make Playoffs @ Buccaneers (11-5) L 35 - 36..................................Playoffs vs. Raiders (4-12) L 13 - 16..................................Did not Make Playoffs vs. Chargers (9-7) L 17 - 23..................................Did not Make Playoffs @ Rams (6-10) W 24 - 9..................................Did not Make Playoffs @ Cardinals (5-11) W 17 - 13..................................Did not Make Playoffs vs. Cowboys (9-7) W 35 - 7..................................Did not Make Playoffs vs. Giants (12-4) W 35 - 20..................................Playoffs @ Eagles (6-10) W 31-20..................................Did not Make Playoffs Opponents Total………………………………………….140-115 Games vs. Play-Off Opponents………………………….6 Wins vs. Play-Off Opponents……………………………3 Games vs. teams w/ winning Records...............................10 i also want to look at the games you consider suspect. You can't say anything about St. Louis and Arizona because the seahawks played them twice each this year. Dallas and Washington is the best rivalry in NFL history and can go either way no matter what. Also, you said in other posts that Dallas was a fading team. Yeah, they still finished 9-7 and if they had beaten us would have made the playoffs. That game was huge and youre acting like it's nothing. The Giants game. I can't even believe you're questioning that win. That team went in to your place and ACTUALLY won. 3 missed game winning field goals, good job "winning" that game. Philly wasn't too good, but they would have loved to play spoiler and the seahawks played them with a "high school quarterback" as well. We have beaten all four of the top NFC seeds already this year and have the best NFC record. The seahawks may have made the playoffs in the NFC East, but probably not. Go away. We all hate you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 And yet another Seahawks fan downplays our winning streak because it was accomplished against NFC West teams. Kind of ironic, don't you think? I've crunched some numbers showing how NFL statistics are not always what they seem to be. The Seahawks and Redskins played 10 games against common opponents (including the head-to-head) with each team going 9-1 in those games. The common opponents are not exactly the same because each team played two games against their divisional opponents so there will be some variation in the opponents expected results. The Seahawks are ranked the 5th best rush defense giving up 94.4 ypg. The Redskins are ranked 13th giving up 105.4 ypg. At the surface that appears to be a fairly substantial advantage but if you look deeper into the numbers the Skins fair quite well in comparison. The 16 teams that the Seahawks played averaged 106.6 ypg rushing so they in effect held their opponents to ~12 fewer yards rushing than expected. The 16 teams that the Redskins played averagd 117.6 ypg rushing so they in effect held their opponents to the same 12 fewer yards per game. Now if you move on to the common opponents for the Seahawks the expected result in rushing yards in those games is 102.5 ypg. The actual result was 101.7 or an improvement of 0.8 ypg. The Redskins 10 common opponents should have been expected to rush for 111.4 ypg. The Skins, however, held these opponents to 107.1 ypg. So while the Seahawks averaged fewer yards per game against they actually didn't limit the expected result as much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueTalon Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 but well, even YOU guys can win a game here and there.13 of them, apparently. (8 of them "here", 5 of them "there"). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savetar Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 All that we needed to to secure the #1 seed.The truth of the matter is that everytime you point out the Hawks should have lost to the Giants, we can point out that the Skins should have lost to the Hawks. You say you easily handled the 49ers at home (52-17) while we struggled against them on the road (27-25)? We say we also demolished the 49ers at home (41-3) and also destroyed the Eagles in Philly on MNF (42-0) versus your less impressive win (31-20). You say we barely beat the Cowboys, we say you lost to the Raiders. You say we're weak because we play in a pansy division, we say both teams went 6-0 versus common opponents in the same venue. It's tit-for-tat all the way down the line... The unfortunate thing about this post is that you conclude it all as tit-for-tat. Here is the TRUTH OF THE MATTER: Your vaunted offense played 10 of its 13 wins against not even arguably, but definitely the worst teams in the NFL. And the fact that anyone is caring how bad anybody beat the 49ers, or Philly, or St. Louis, or Arizona, or Tennessee, or Houston (God they are awful!)! Should be considered a sin worthy of excommunication. Here is the definitive statistic as published by another of our Redskin Genuises: Strength of Schedule for the Seahawks is LAST IN THE RANKINGS! And if you need more proof of your vulnerability, if you notice in most of your games, your team wins by 3-points to any team who is playoff or of descent caliber. (Check the record - it's true, it's soooo true!) :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lefty420 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 The unfortunate thing about this post is that you conclude it all as tit-for-tat. Here is the TRUTH OF THE MATTER: Your vaunted offense played 10 of its 13 wins against not even arguably, but definitely the worst teams in the NFL. And the fact that anyone is caring how bad anybody beat the 49ers, or Philly, or St. Louis, or Arizona, or Tennessee, or Houston (God they are awful!)! Should be considered a sin worthy of excommunication. Here is the definitive statistic as published by another of our Redskin Genuises: Strength of Schedule for the Seahawks is LAST IN THE RANKINGS! And if you need more proof of your vulnerability, if you notice in most of your games, your team wins by 3-points to any team who is playoff or of descent caliber. (Check the record - it's true, it's soooo true!) :doh: SO TRUE MY FRIEND. U FOR GOT 1 STAT THEY CAN'T SHAKE.ITS NOT AN ANYLASIS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. ITS FACT WRITTEN IN STONE STATS. WHATS IS IT WELL I THINK WE ALL KNOW IT WE BEAT THE SEAHAWKS. EXPLAIN THAT ONE U TROLLS. WE BEAT U. SO UNTIL U BEAT US SHUT UP CAUSE U LOOK DUMB. AFTER THE GIANTS BEAT US THE FIRST TIME I CONGRATULATED THEM AND AT THE GAME ON X-MAS EVE I KEPT MY MOUTH SHUT. WHY BEACUSE WINNING IS ALL THAT MATTERS. WE BEAT U. DON;T MATTER HOW OR BY HOW MANY POINTS. NO MATTER HOW MANY WINS U GOT.THIS IS THE SECOND SEASON AND ITS WIDE OPEN. BUT ONCE AGAIN WE BEAT U. OH AND INCASE U FORGOT WE BEAT U. PLAIN AND SIMPLE STAT. ITS MY FAVOIRTE SEAHWAKS VS SKINS THIS YEAR 0-1THATS RIGHT U LOST TO THE WORST 3-0 TEAM IN THE HISTPRY OF THE LEAGUE. OF COURSE WE GOT LUCKY AND WE SUCK BUT WE BEAT U AND I AM SURE WE WILL SUCK OUR WAY TO ANOTHER WIN SATURDAY. AND U KNOW WHY I CAN SAY THAT. 1. I AM ONMY BOARDNOT UR SUCKY ASS BOARDS 2. WE BEAT U. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. NO OTHER STAT IS NEEDED now what does strength of schedule tell us. well notmuch but it does tell us the skins can play with some of the best teams in the nfl. we don;t know anything about the seahwaks so ur right its not fair for them. but we will see how u do on saturday. remebr we beat u. i haven;t forgot like u seahawk trolls ahve. every one forget all the stats. all we need to do is say we beat them cause we did lol. that is a stat they can;t smoke and mirror away. we beat them yea thats right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueTalon Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 SO TRUE MY FRIEND. U FOR GOT 1 STAT THEY CAN'T SHAKE.ITS NOT AN ANYLASIS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. ITS FACT WRITTEN IN STONE STATS. WHATS IS IT WELL I THINK WE ALL KNOW ITWE BEAT THE SEAHAWKS. EXPLAIN THAT ONE U TROLLS. WE BEAT U. SO UNTIL U BEAT US SHUT UP CAUSE U LOOK DUMB. AFTER THE GIANTS BEAT US THE FIRST TIME I CONGRATULATED THEM AND AT THE GAME ON X-MAS EVE I KEPT MY MOUTH SHUT. WHY BEACUSE WINNING IS ALL THAT MATTERS. WE BEAT U. DON;T MATTER HOW OR BY HOW MANY POINTS. NO MATTER HOW MANY WINS U GOT.THIS IS THE SECOND SEASON AND ITS WIDE OPEN. BUT ONCE AGAIN WE BEAT U. OH AND INCASE U FORGOT WE BEAT U. PLAIN AND SIMPLE STAT. ITS MY FAVOIRTE SEAHWAKS VS SKINS THIS YEAR 0-1THATS RIGHT U LOST TO THE WORST 3-0 TEAM IN THE HISTPRY OF THE LEAGUE. OF COURSE WE GOT LUCKY AND WE SUCK BUT WE BEAT U AND I AM SURE WE WILL SUCK OUR WAY TO ANOTHER WIN SATURDAY. AND U KNOW WHY I CAN SAY THAT. 1. I AM ONMY BOARDNOT UR SUCKY ASS BOARDS 2. WE BEAT U. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. NO OTHER STAT IS NEEDED now what does strength of schedule tell us. well notmuch but it does tell us the skins can play with some of the best teams in the nfl. we don;t know anything about the seahwaks so ur right its not fair for them. but we will see how u do on saturday. remebr we beat u. i haven;t forgot like u seahawk trolls ahve. every one forget all the stats. all we need to do is say we beat them cause we did lol. that is a stat they can;t smoke and mirror away. we beat them yea thats right 16. REFRAIN FROM POSTING IN ALL CAPITALS. On the internet, posting in all capitals is considered shouting, and as such is considered rude and offensive. Overuse of capital letters also creates a strain on the eyesight, and makes it difficult to read text. Caps should be used to show emphasis for only one or two words. I'd recommend taking a few minutes to read the rules, in case any have slipped your mind. I'd also recommend that you take an extra minute or two when you post, to get basic things straight like spelling, punctuation and capitalization. The occasional typo is understandable, but you're like typing in ebonics. It takes longer to decipher what you wrote (I mean, if you're interested in people understanding what you write...) It's not like something catastrophic is going to happen if you don't get that post posted 10 seconds sooner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lefty420 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 16. REFRAIN FROM POSTING IN ALL CAPITALS. On the internet, posting in all capitals is considered shouting, and as such is considered rude and offensive. Overuse of capital letters also creates a strain on the eyesight, and makes it difficult to read text. Caps should be used to show emphasis for only one or two words.I'd recommend taking a few minutes to read the rules, in case any have slipped your mind. I'd also recommend that you take an extra minute or two when you post, to get basic things straight like spelling, punctuation and capitalization. The occasional typo is understandable, but you're like typing in ebonics. It takes longer to decipher what you wrote (I mean, if you're interested in people understanding what you write...) It's not like something catastrophic is going to happen if you don't get that post posted 10 seconds sooner. i didn't post in all caps. part of my post was in all caps. thats with in the rules.i think i would know i ahve read them thanks. take it elsewhere also do u thinki give a damn what a seahawk fan thinks on my board. please. no one of my tribe of the skins fans seems to care so much so stuff it. take a hike. go back to ur board. cause guess what i don't fing care what u think or say. i have had enough of u and all ur friends this week. ur pathetic. HOWS THIS. IS THIS TOMUCH CAPS FOR YOU HOW IS THIS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lefty420 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 BETTER YET HOW ABOUT THIS. WE BEAT U ALREADY THIS YEAR!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daklu Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Oh please. There is no smoke and mirrors going on there.I never said I thought there were. Smoke and mirrors implies intentionally trying to present an inaccurate picture. Aside from excluding the four AFC games (which may or may not have been an intentional attempt to skew data - I make no claims either way,) I think your analysis is simply misguided from a lack extensive analysis experience.And I don't agree that summing rankings is not a indication of RELATIVE strengths and weaknesses.Disagreeing is certainly your perogative; however, any analyst worth his salt would agree that using ordinal data for analysis is far, FAR inferior to using the underlying continuous data.Let me try to illustrate some of the flaws in your analysis above. Let's say the Blue team, over the course of a season, gained 4,000 yards passing (ranking #1) and 1,000 yards rushing (ranking #32) while the Red team gained 1,000 yards passing (ranking #32) and 4,000 yards rushing (ranking #1.) Both teams gained 5,000 yards for the season, but when summing the rankings we are given a different picture: Blue Team Passing Rank - 1 Receiving Rank - 1 Rushing Rank - 32 Total - 34 Red Team Passing Rank - 32 Receiving Rank - 32 Rushing Rank - 1 Total - 65 Could anyone honestly conclude that the Blue team is that much better from the Red team when they know the underlying statistics? Furthermore, let's assume the Yellow team gained 1100 yards rushing (ranked #2) and 1100 yards passing (ranked #2.) (Note that Blue and Red tied for total offense while Yellow came in third.) Blue: Total Offense - 1t, Passing - 1, Receiving - 1, Running - 32, Total = 35 Red: Total Offense - 1t, Passing - 32, Receiving -32, Running - 1, Total = 66 Yellow: Total Offense - 3, Passing - 2, Receiving - 2, Running - 2, Total = 9 Based on summing the ordinal data, the Yellow offense is clearly the best offense of the three when in fact they produced less than 1/2 the total yards of either of the other two teams. Summing ordinal data is simply not a good way to analyze it. Anyway, it matters not. We all know how football is... Anything can happen...On this we agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lefty420 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I never said I thought there were. Smoke and mirrors implies intentionally trying to present an inaccurate picture. Aside from excluding the four AFC games (which may or may not have been an intentional attempt to skew data - I make no claims either way,) I think your analysis is simply misguided from a lack extensive analysis experience.Disagreeing is certainly your perogative; however, any analyst worth his salt would agree that using ordinal data for analysis is far, FAR inferior to using the underlying continuous data. Let me try to illustrate some of the flaws in your analysis above. Let's say the Blue team, over the course of a season, gained 4,000 yards passing (ranking #1) and 1,000 yards rushing (ranking #32) while the Red team gained 1,000 yards passing (ranking #32) and 4,000 yards rushing (ranking #1.) Both teams gained 5,000 yards for the season, but when summing the rankings we are given a different picture: Blue Team Passing Rank - 1 Receiving Rank - 1 Rushing Rank - 32 Total - 34 Red Team Passing Rank - 32 Receiving Rank - 32 Rushing Rank - 1 Total - 65 Could anyone honestly conclude that the Blue team is that much better from the Red team when they know the underlying statistics? Furthermore, let's assume the Yellow team gained 1100 yards rushing (ranked #2) and 1100 yards passing (ranked #2.) (Note that Blue and Red tied for total offense while Yellow came in third.) Blue: Total Offense - 1t, Passing - 1, Receiving - 1, Running - 32, Total = 35 Red: Total Offense - 1t, Passing - 32, Receiving -32, Running - 1, Total = 66 Yellow: Total Offense - 3, Passing - 2, Receiving - 2, Running - 2, Total = 9 Based on summing the ordinal data, the Yellow offense is clearly the best offense of the three when in fact they produced less than 1/2 the total yards of either of the other two teams. Summing ordinal data is simply not a good way to analyze it. On this we agree. HOW BOUT THIS STAT. SKINS VS SEAHAWKS 1-0 THIS YEAR. IT DON;T GET NO EASIER THAN THAT NOW DOES IT LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lefty420 Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 lol yeah that shut u seahawk trolls up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjo62 Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 lol yeah that shut u seahawk trolls up How bout dis. 1-1 after Saturday. OOOO that should shut them up. Wee haw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lefty420 Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 How bout dis. 1-1 after Saturday. OOOO that should shut them up. Wee haw. once again u have yet to beat us and u are 4-0 against gibs. so right now u have no room to hee haw u loser. 1-0 this year and get the hell off my board Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueTalon Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Lefty, if it was your board, you'd have a better handle on the rules. " Caps should be used to show emphasis for only one or two words." But at least you found the CAPS LOCK key... Hey, how about this for a stat: The Seahawks are #1 in Red Zone Offense The Seahawks are #2 in Red Zone Defense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#1Redskins Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 And during this AMAZING run to the playoffs you beat-AZ, St. Louis(with a 3rd string QB), Giants, Cowgirls, Philly(with a High School QB). Seems we played(and beat) all those teams...but OUR schedule was weak? :doh: Dude you can't take ARI, STL, and SF IN YOUR DIVISION put together against NY and DAL alone! The Seahawks had it easy compared to the Skins so Shut your mouth................:point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.