Solving the Great Bye-Week Mystery

[Darth Tater]

Against St Louis, Aldrick Robinson drops a pass that would have set us up in the red zone. Against Atlanta, we had the ball 3rd and short inside the 20. Make that fg and we probably carry a 14-0 lead into the half. Against the Cowboys the first time, Aldrick Robinson makes a long ball catch for a TD. Against Dallas the second time, we had the ball on third down inside the 20 and got a foul, we ended up scoring the final TD

[Oldfan]

Coincidence means there are several factors that do not have a causal relationship. So, if the change in record is due mostly to coincidence, I take that to mean there are no causal relationships between the differences in record and anything that might affect that.

You are misinterpreting my point by taking a sentence out of context. Here, read it again. I have underlined the specific coincidence involved:

I'm not arguing that we improved as a team or that the coaching improved. My argument is the 3-6 start versus the 7-0 finish was due mostly to coincidence. It just happened that we have a coaching edge in the division and five of our last seven were division games while Cleveland was the easiest non-division game and we caught Baltimore at a good time.

There is a causal relationship between the coaching edge in our division and wins in our division. The fact that five of our last seven wins were division games is a scheduling coincidence which helps explain the seven-game streak.

Do I think your assertion has some merit? Absolutely. Do I think it's the most plausible explanation? I don't know because I don't think there is an accurate way to rule out other possibilities or prove your point.

Like most arguments, I present it as the most plausible conclusion. My argument can be countered by arguing reasons that it is not plausible or by presenting competing explanations, as many have done.

---------- Post added January-3rd-2013 at 07:02 PM ----------

...There you go. Shanahan was a "terrible choice"...And BTW... My reading comprehension... Tested as top 2 percentile in the nation...

I stand by every word in the post you quoted and there is no contradiction. I did not write that Mike was a mediocre head coach.

I don't care if you were #1 in the nation in reading comprehension. You were wrong this time and you lack the strength of character to admit it and apologize.

---------- Post added January-3rd-2013 at 07:12 PM ----------

...I'm inclined to believe it's a combination of factors...

Probably, but as I said in the OP, I was looking for the most likely major factor.

[brandymac27]

While I think OF makes a valid point in the OP, I also think that Morris' production before and after the bye shouldn't be discredited.

For example, before the bye, he averaged 88.1 yards over the stretch and had 5 TD's. After the bye, he averaged 117.1 yards over the 7 game win streak and had 8 TD's.

If you want to deal with measurables only, I think the increase in production from Morris, along with better coaching (both on the offense and especially on defense) played a factor. But, I do feel that other factors played a significant role too....like players stepping up on both sides of the ball, and the increasing confidence that they must have experienced as they continued to win games.

[Oldfan]

While I think OF makes a valid point in the OP, I also think that Morris' production before and after the bye shouldn't be discredited.

For example, before the bye, he averaged 88.1 yards over the stretch and had 5 TD's. After the bye, he averaged 117.1 yards over the 7 game win streak and had 8 TD's.

If you want to deal with measurables only, I think the increase in production from Morris, along with better coaching (both on the offense and especially on defense) played a factor. But, I do feel that other factors played a significant role too....like players stepping up on both sides of the ball, and the increasing confidence that they must have experienced as they continued to win games.

Was Morris's increased production a primary cause or was it first an effect then a cause in a chain reaction?

EXAMPLE: Kyle called 33 runs for Morris who amassed 200 yards against the Cowboys. That 200 yards raised his average over the final seven games considerably but it was Kyle's calling of 33 runs that caused the chain reaction ending in 200 yards gained.

In other words, you aren't contradicting my theory of better game planning in division games by bringing in Morris's increased production. Better game planning ought to enhance the performances of several players.

[Mad Mike]

I stand by every word in the post you quoted and there is no contradiction. I did not write that Mike was a mediocre head coach.

I don't care if you were #1 in the nation in reading comprehension. You were wrong this time and you lack the strength of character to admit it and apologize.

I'm guessing You missed it when I clarified with your exact words....

Nah, you didn't call him mediocre. You just called him "a proven mediocre performer"

And I'm sorry I opened another one of your silly threads, I'll move along now.

[LD0506]

Well I think OF put his finger on something, coming into this year Shanny & Co. focused efforts on winning within the division as an element of the growth of this team. I doubt they were counting on a 7 game streak to offset early losses but concentrating on players, schemes, etc., to improve matchups against those teams we know and play twice every year was important, and it bore fruit. It is something to build on, you try and maintain that while adding additional strengths in areas that will allow you take anyone on, and then you've got something.

Personally I'm glad the way things worked out, I'll take that 3-6 and then the streak while going 5/1 in the div. and all the mystical magical momentum I can get.

[skinny21]

The defense is playing better; but a better game plan against divisional opponents would explain WHY it played better after the bye.

It's a good point OF. Our defense seemed to come up biggest against the division foes.

I would also argue that personell consistency helped. New-ish guys to our lineup like Jenkins, Jackson and (dare I say it) Madieu have all looked more comfortable as the weeks have gone on. Perhaps this is their personal growth in the system, and perhaps it's Haslett utilizing them better (which goes back to coaching). Either way, I think coaching and knowledge of our most played opponents have been a huge factor.

[HighOnHendrix]

I really think Andrew had very little to do with it.

That's such a terrible joke. Lucky for me you beat me to it!

[London Kev]

The commentator during the dallas game made a point of saying that Haslett had given Fletch full control to change plays on the field. Was he just stating how things are in general, or is this a new development?

I think that there are too many variables involved to explain us winning any one specific game, trying to explain a run of seven wins can probably never be conclusive.

That said, the defense tightening up by seven points a game has got to be a factor. How much of this is down to JH remains to be seen, but unless we find out that Morris has been more involved in the defense or something then I think that Haslett deserves some credit.

[mbws]

As a division, we went 8-8 against the NFC South and AFC North, 1-3 against the NFC West and 2-2 against the NFC North. I wouldn't say the division "sucked", but tied for 5th of 8 isn't great.

I got Nothing.

[Oldfan]

I'm guessing You missed it when I clarified with your exact words....

No, you missed again. Let me explain. Reading Comprehension 101: Words and sentences can change meaning in context. Thus, you can't take statements out of context and claim that you understand their meaning or, in good conscience, present them to others with your own interpretations. That's just an underhanded debating trick that incompetent debaters use when they have nothing of substance to offer.

[MustangSteve]

I agree oldfan, with the rise of the defense. During the 3-6 record our defense was allowing a 23 point ave per game. During the 7-0 run, they only allowed a 17 point ave. If they keep this 17 point average, this team could end up in the Super Bowl for real.

[BLEED-B&G]

I was thinking about this today actually, nice thread. I have confidence in our coaching staffs ability against anyone in the league. I don't think we can be "out coached" or "out schemed".

We've had an answer for everything so far. I hope that trend continues.

[MassSkinsFan]

You are misinterpreting my point by taking a sentence out of context. Here, read it again. I have underlined the specific coincidence involved:

I'm not arguing that we improved as a team or that the coaching improved. My argument is the 3-6 start versus the 7-0 finish was due mostly to coincidence. It just happened that we have a coaching edge in the division and five of our last seven were division games while Cleveland was the easiest non-division game and we caught Baltimore at a good time.

There is a causal relationship between the coaching edge in our division and wins in our division. The fact that five of our last seven wins were division games is a scheduling coincidence which helps explain the seven-game streak.

There is no need to explain the finer points of your thought process - I get it. I'm really smart too, and I was in the top 0.01% in reading comprehension (and any other category including humility) nationally every time I was tested.

But that doesn't matter.

Like I said before I tend to agree with your assertion but the temporal element has an impact. The team and coaches got better through the course of the season. Had the schedule been flip-flopped (assuming no other changes to personnel availability and rate of improvement) would we have still split our wins and losses the way we did for divisional v non-divisional? If so, we'd have actually gotten worse over the course of the season. If the opposite were true (we did better after the bye) that would mean we performed much better against non-divisional opponents. This is what bothers me about using the difference between games 1-9 and 10-16 to support your assertion. What it suggests to me is that any relation between record and familiarity with opponents (i.e. the second time around factor) is likely coincidental. For example:

When I watch our offense I tend to focus on the OL. I noticed a marked improvement in their play and communication over time this season. I think it has contributed significantly to our second-half record being so much better. Part of it is down to better execution and familiarity, part to improved coaching. But, I think it is correlated to the passage of time, not our schedule.

[JMUSkins]

I agree oldfan, with the rise of the defense. During the 3-6 record our defense was allowing a 23 point ave per game. During the 7-0 run, they only allowed a 17 point ave. If they keep this 17 point average, this team could end up in the Super Bowl for real.

Okay... I'm a grown ass man and I just giggle when I read that. I'm giddy with excitement haha!

[redskinss]

i know our defense has improved but im curious to how much they have improved statisticaly.

can anybody tell me where our defense would rank overall if you threw out the first nine games of the season?

[Oldfan]

...When I watch our offense I tend to focus on the OL. I noticed a marked improvement in their play and communication over time this season. I think it has contributed significantly to our second-half record being so much better. Part of it is down to better execution and familiarity, part to improved coaching. But, I think it is correlated to the passage of time, not our schedule.

On the offense, Garcon was a plus, RG3's injury was a minus, and the O-line's improvement a plus. But, we were looking for the major factor in explaining the win streak and, since the defense improved more than the offense, it seems to me unlikely that the O-line was the major factor.

[Busch1724]

The team started strongish but Orakpo and Garcon got injured...look at our teams record with and without Pierre. He creates a matchup problem and opens up the offense to get other guys involved in the passing game. Also RG3 has progressed throughout the weeks up to and post bye week. Jim is dialing up more pressure for sure.

However I think the biggest reason was the timing of our bye week. Weeks 8 and 9 the team kind of looked tired. They were going full steam since the end of July without a break. A late season bye helps in the that regard that it allows a team to "freshen" up a bit for the final push, especially mentally where we had big breakdowns on big plays (the Cruz play).

[Oldfan]

...However I think the biggest reason was the timing of our bye week. Weeks 8 and 9 the team kind of looked tired. They were going full steam since the end of July without a break. A late season bye helps in the that regard that it allows a team to "freshen" up a bit for the final push, especially mentally where we had big breakdowns on big plays (the Cruz play).

Your "refreshed" reasoning makes sense, but it doesn't quite make the grade when trying to explain such a drastic turnaround.

If they had played a little better after the bye, the refreshed theory works better, but to go from 3-6 to 7-0 needs a stronger theory.

[pjfootballer]

I'm just not so sure there is "one" major factor. Everyone has come up with contributing factors throughout the thread that could somewhat justify the turnaround, but I'm not sure that you will find that one factor that you are looking for OF. There is so much that goes into a football team, that I don't think you'll find the answer unless you talked to the team and staff directly. Then, you still may not get an answer.

[Oldfan]

I'm just not so sure there is "one" major factor. Everyone has come up with contributing factors throughout the thread that could somewhat justify the turnaround, but I'm not sure that you will find that one factor that you are looking for OF. There is so much that goes into a football team, that I don't think you'll find the answer unless you talked to the team and staff directly. Then, you still may not get an answer.

Logically, in any group of factors, there is always one that has a greater impact than the rest.

[MassSkinsFan]

On the offense, Garcon was a plus, RG3's injury was a minus, and the O-line's improvement a plus. But, we were looking for the major factor in explaining the win streak and, since the defense improved more than the offense, it seems to me unlikely that the O-line was the major factor.

Just because there was more overall D improvement doesn't mean that one of the O improvements couldn't be the biggest factor, does it?

If you have 5 D improvements with arbitrary scores of +5, +6, +7, +8 and +9 (total +35) and 3 O improvements with scores of +5, +6 and +10, (total +21) one of the O improvements was the most significant single factor.

Based on PF/PA, they both improved, and the difference is probably too small to matter:

Before the bye:

40 – 32

28 – 31

31 – 38

24 – 22

17 – 24

38 – 26

23 – 27

12 – 27

13 – 21

PF: 25.1

PA: 24.6

Differential: +0.5

After the bye:

31 – 6

38 – 31

17 – 16

31 – 28

38 – 21

27 – 20

28 – 18

PF: 30

PA: 20

Differential: +10

PF Differential Pre- to Post-Bye: +4.9

PA Differential Pre- to Post-Bye: -4.6

Of course, ST is not factored in, nor are points off turnovers. Sadly I don't have time for that right now.

[pjfootballer]

Logically, in any group of factors, there is always one that has a greater impact than the rest.

I don't disagree, but the impact may not be "that" much greater than the others, so it may be harder to figure out which one stands out is all I was saying.

[Oldfan]

Just because there was more overall D improvement doesn't mean that one of the O improvements couldn't be the biggest factor, does it?

It's possible that the O improvement could be greater, sure. But, it's unlikely -- and the plausibility of your hypothesis is based on the likelihood or probability of it being the strongest factor.

--------------------------------------------

If you re-check your numbers, I think you will find a 3.0 error in the PA of the 3-6 start. You apparently missed one of those 27 PA games.

I think the final numbers should be:

PF Differential Pre- to Post-Bye: +4.9

PA Differential Pre- to Post-Bye: -7.6

---------- Post added January-4th-2013 at 11:32 AM ----------

I don't disagree, but the impact may not be "that" much greater than the others, so it may be harder to figure out which one stands out is all I was saying.

That makes sense.

[Busch1724]

Your "refreshed" reasoning makes sense, but it doesn't quite make the grade when trying to explain such a drastic turnaround.

If they had played a little better after the bye, the refreshed theory works better, but to go from 3-6 to 7-0 needs a stronger theory.

As pjfootballer stated there's so many factors. I do think that with so much parity and many of the NFL games coming down to one or two key plays, I truly believe the mental break allowed our team to focus better. We had less dropped passes, less blown blocking assignments, less blown coverages, less missed tackles, etc.

That or maybe our favorite team is ODing on adderall.