themurf Posted September 20, 2012 Author Share Posted September 20, 2012 The team is better at home than on the road. That is the very definition of home field advantage. Mike Shanahan had one losing season at home during 18 years as the head coach of the Denver Broncos. That's a home-field advantage. Being one game under .500 after 15 years worth of games? Not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeSkins Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Dude, musicians definitely put on better shows when their fans are into it. Music is emotional, football is also emotional. Both musicians and football players feed off the fan's energy and perform better when the crowd is amped. Putting on a better show is not the same as playing better. Also I think we're talking about different kinds of concerts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SittingBull Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Redskins haven't had a better team advantage since Fedex Field opened either. What a coincidence! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RansomthePasserby Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Mike Shanahan had one losing season at home during 18 years as the head coach of the Denver Broncos. That's a home-field advantage. Being one game under .500 after 15 years worth of games? Not so much. I think what people are trying to say is, it's not the home field advantage that's the problem, it's the team. We play better at home than we do on the road, so playing at home obviously gives us an advantage. The thing is, half the time, our team sucks so bad we STILL lose. ---------- Post added September-20th-2012 at 05:18 PM ---------- Putting on a better show is not the same as playing better. Also I think we're talking about different kinds of concerts. Well, your argument might be true for, say, a classical orchestra concert. And it might also be true for baseball... but football's rock and roll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenspandan Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 this is a result of our team being awful. Of course history shows there is no homefield advantage. home field advantage is easy to calculate. take the win percentage at home and subtract the win percentage away. you could do this for each team and see how much better they were at home versus away. the redskins, since the opening of fedex, are 59-60 at home (49.5%). Away, they are 46-76 (37.7%). that's an 11.8% advantage to playing at home. i ran the same numbers for the cowboys, giants, and eagles from 2000 through 2011: giants home record: 51/45 (53%) giants away record: 56/40 (58%) difference: -5% (they are 5% better AWAY) philly home record: 59/37 (61%) philly away record: 62/34 (64%) difference: -3% (they are 3% better AWAY) dallas home record: 55/44 (57%) dallas away record: 41/55 (43%) difference: +14% compared to the Giants and Philly, the Redskins' +11.8% looks like a pretty significant advantage. It's the teams who see no uptick in performance at home that can truly say they have no home field advantage. ---------- Post added September-20th-2012 at 04:26 PM ---------- The Redskins having a home-field advantage at FedEx is 'complete and utter nonsense' in reality. i don't think you know what home field advantage means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 ..... i don't think you know what home field advantage means. This is just going round and round in circles, but with respect, in reality, I don't think you do either. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RansomthePasserby Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 home field advantage is easy to calculate. take the win percentage at home and subtract the win percentage away. you could do this for each team and see how much better they were at home versus away. the redskins, since the opening of fedex, are 59-60 at home (49.5%). Away, they are 46-76 (37.7%). that's an 11.8% advantage to playing at home. i ran the same numbers for the cowboys, giants, and eagles from 2000 through 2011: giants home record: 51/45 (53%) giants away record: 56/40 (58%) difference: -5% (they are 5% better AWAY) philly home record: 59/37 (61%) philly away record: 62/34 (64%) difference: -3% (they are 3% better AWAY) dallas home record: 55/44 (57%) dallas away record: 41/55 (43%) difference: +14% compared to the Giants and Philly, the Redskins' +11.8% looks like a pretty significant advantage. Exactly, comparing how you play at home to a winning record at home doesn't tell you anything. There's no control, you're comparing how they play at home to how they play at home. In order to accurately measure home field advantage, you have to remove how they play at at home all together (in other words, how the team plays away.) That gives you a datum to measure from. From there, you can see what the advantage is ---------- Post added September-20th-2012 at 05:37 PM ---------- This is just going round and round in circles, but with respect, in reality, I don't think you do either. Hail. GHH, he does know what he's talking about. No offense, but I don't understand how you don't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 RPb, comparing home and away records, which are both shocking, and claiming we have a home-field advantage because one is better than other is complete and utter bunkum in reality. Our record on our HOME FIELD is 60-60-1 through every game during FedEx's existence. That's not a home advantage. That's as much an advantage to the visiting teams coming to FedEx as it to the home team. Phiily winning 22 games more at home over the period than they've lost, is a home-field advantage. To a lesser exttent, Dallas winning 11 more is a home-field advantage. Hell, even the Giants winning 6 more is more of an advantage to them at home than FedEx is to us. We've not had a winning season at home in 5 years. We're on a 6 game home losing streak. Where the HELL is the advantage in that, to name but two recent woeful home records? Just because Redskins fans want to console themselves in the fact we're slightly less woeful at home than on the road doesn't change the fact that the Washington Redskins utterly mediocre .500 record at FedEx Field, with a whopping ONE play-off game in large part down to that horrid record through the duration; is NOT a home-field advantage. I don't know how clearer this can be put than the OP or subsequent posts. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Est.1974 Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 I think the first two games of this season tell us all we need to know about the key to winning football games. Where the game is played is a long way from being the most critical factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RansomthePasserby Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 RPb, comparing home and away records, which are both shocking, and claiming we have a home-field advantage because one is better than other is complete and utter bunkum in reality. Our record on our HOME FIELD is 60-60-1 through every game during FedEx's existence. That's not a home advantage. That's as much an advantage to the visiting teams coming to FedEx as it to the home team. Phiily winning 22 games more at home over the period than they've lost, is a home-field advantage. To a lesser exttent, Dallas winning 11 more is a home-field advantage. Hell, even the Giants winning 6 more is more of an advantage to them at home than FedEx is to us. We've not had a winning season at home in 5 years. We're on a 6 game home losing streak. Where the HELL is the advantage in that, to name but two recent woeful home records? Just because Redskins fans want to console themselves in the fact we're slightly less woeful at home than on the road doesn't change the fact that the Washington Redskins utterly mediocre .500 record at FedEx Field, with a whopping ONE play-off game in large part down to that horrid record through the duration; is NOT a home-field advantage. I don't know how clearer this can be put than the OP or subsequent posts. Hail. What you're saying is, over the past 20 years the Redskins have sucked. I totally agree with that. It's the our weak teams that have given us the poor home record, not NOT having a home field advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacon Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 The only example I think of an otherwise average/decent team with a remarkable home record is Seattle. All of the crappy teams lack home field advantage because, well, they're beatable everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhodus333 Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Something else to consider though...... While we don't seem to do very well at home DOWN THE STRETCH, we HAVE won our last 5 straight home openers. And that was without RG3 (or any talent at QB really). I think the numbers definitley point towards some homefield advantage this week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 What you're saying is, over the past 20 years the Redskins have sucked. I totally agree with that. It's the our weak teams that have given us the poor home record, not NOT having a home field advantage. Whatever the reasons behind it, we have NO home-field advantage. And posters manipulating the facts to make themselves feel better because we've happened to suck a little less at home than on the road through FedEx's existence doesn't change that fact. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobGriffin Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 we haven't had a homefield advantage because we were not good enough to win games consistently.. we sucked. Really doesn't take in depth analysis. I bet our home record overall is better than our road record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Whatever the reasons behind it, we have NO home-field advantage. And posters manipulating the facts to make themselves feel better because we've happened to suck a little less at home than on the road through FedEx's existence doesn't change that fact. Hail. Feel better about what? Our team sucks. There's nothing to feel better about. But as a sucky team we play better at home than we do away. We have an advantage playing at home, because we play better than we do when we aren't at home. Teams that play us at at FedEx are less likely to beat us than if they didn't. That's home field advantage. Now if you are saying that over the past 16 years a team that enters FedEx has an even chance at coming away with a win and therefore there's 'no advantage', that's true. But that has nothing to do with the venue. It has to do with the fact that the team sucks. It's a team-sucking disadvantage that counters the natural home-field advantage. We can see this clearly as the team plays better at home than it does away. If we had, say, an average team over the past 16 years, we'd have a winning record at home. That's what 'home field advantage' gives you. An extra little something. Three points according to bookies. And we have that, just like most other teams do. Moreso than some, not as much as some others. Why you seem so hell-bent on making this out to be some failing on the fans' part is beyond me. If the fans didn't care, if we were just 'consumers' or whatever, the Redskins wouldn't play any better at home than they do on the road. Fact is, we play just about as much better (a .125 difference in win percentage) at FedEx than we did at RFK for the previous 15 years (a .132 diference). It logically follows that if we start averaging 10 or so wins a season, like we did back then, we will start winning 5 or 6 games at home. Like we did back then. Our fans didn't become crappy fans. The team became a crappy team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Henry, we shall have to agree to disagree on this as we're going around and around in never ending circles. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Henry, we shall have to agree to disagree on this as we're going around and around in never ending circles. Hail. Sure. But let's do this. If Griffin works out and this team starts consistently winning games again let's revisit this and see if we're still .500 at home. If we are, your opinion will be proven valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RansomthePasserby Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Henry, we shall have to agree to disagree on this as we're going around and around in never ending circles. Hail. I think we're really having a debate about what the words "home field advantage" means. To me and a few of the other posters, it means there's a greater chance we'll win at home vs. winning on the road, which is true. As I understand it, the posters on your side are talking about an advantage over other teams that play us at home, which there really is non because we're .500 in FedEx. I think we're both right according to our definitions. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Sure.But let's do this. If Griffin works out and this team starts consistently winning games again let's revisit this and see if we're still .500 at home. If we are, your opinion will be proven valid. The fact that you think we have a home-field advantage because we suck less at home than we do away, regardless of the fact that we are at .500 through the entirety of the Stadium; whilst other folk like myself and the OP completely and utterly disagree makes the above a completely spurious argument. Your making it subjective to suit your point. You'd doubtless say we are making it subjective to suit our point. Ergo, it's a never ending vicious circle of hot air whatever happens going forward. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 I think we're really having a debate about what the words "home field advantage" means. To me and a few of the other posters, it means there's a greater chance we'll win at home vs. winning on the road, which is true. As I understand it, the posters on your side are talking about an advantage over other teams that play us at home, which there really is non because we're .500 in FedEx. I think we're both right according to our definitions. Cheers. Exactly. I think it is really an argument about what "home field advantage" means. It depends how you look at the word. Both can be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 The fact that you think we have a home-field advantage because we suck less at home than we do away, regardless of the fact that we are at .500 through the entirety of the Stadium; whilst other folk like myself and the OP completely and utterly disagree makes the above a completely spurious argument. Your making it subjective to suit your point. You'd doubtless say we are making it subjective to suit our point. Ergo, it's a never ending vicious circle of hot air whatever happens going forward. Hail. What is your point? Mine is that this team has chronically sucked. Is yours different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 What is your point?Mine is that this team has chronically sucked. Is yours different? Seriously? Man you'd argue black was white to keep something going. Your reading comprehension certainly isn't that bad that you've neither repeatedly read nor argued the point I was making. Now, as I'm sure this pointless too and fro is boring the living piss out of everyone else reading, I think it's best to agree to disagree, take on board both ways what RtPb last posted, and let it go. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacon Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 ad·van·tage noun 1. any state, circumstance, opportunity, or means specially favorable to success, interest, or any desired end. Seems to me that playing our games at home is, at least in a relative sense, advantageous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Seriously? Man you'd argue black was white to keep something going. Your reading comprehension certainly isn't that bad that you've neither repeatedly read nor argued the point I was making. Now, as I'm sure this pointless too and fro is boring the living piss out of everyone else reading, I think it's best to agree to disagree, take on board both ways what RtPb last posted, and let it go. Hail. You'll just have to forgive my dense-ness but the reason I'm still keeping this alive is not that I have a problem 'agreeing to disagree.' What's sticking is the suggestion that to say we've had piss poor teams so we should expect it is a lame ass excuse on our behalf, the fans. So y'all just expect to sit back and be entertained huh before you get involved, and screw them if the products not upto scratch? No question the product has been the equal of any league bottom dweller over the duration, but we could still of made FedEx a FAR more intimidating place for opposing teams to play. Which in turn may well of inspired that lack of talent to play above themselves and improve the home record. But in many games, we've not played our part either. I just don't think we're just disagreeing about the definition of the phrase 'home field advantage.' If it were that, I'd be fine letting it go. No, what I still take issue with is your opinion that somehow the fans have caused the team to suck at home. And regarding that opinion, the fact that the team plays better at home than on the road, at the same or better significance in record than many other teams in the league ... that fact is relevant. If you are going to repeatedly call my fandom and that of others into question, you can't shrug that off with an 'agree to disagree.' Present something worthy of questioning my integrity. Present maybe one fact as relevant as the one I and others have in this thread to back up what you've just said. Stating that our facts are just 'being manipulated to make ourselves feel better,' while doing a fine job of compounding the insult, is not particularly compelling otherwise as you've backed it up by nothing more than a stubborn opinion as to what is meant by the phrase 'home field advantage' which is irrelevant to whether or not the fans help the team play better. As they clearly do. So I ask again, what exactly is your point? If it's that the team just sucks and we have different definitions of what 'home field advantage' means .. well yes, let's agree to disagree. If it's that the fans are at fault for the team not being better at home, which you've stated or implied three times in this thread ... you need more to convince me to drop it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 ..... If it's that the fans are at fault for the team not being better at home ... you need more to convince me to drop it. I'm going to kind and presume your being deliberately obtuse and facetious at this point, smile, and stop enabling you for the sake of everyone else. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.