Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
This team vs the 1997 team
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TJV" data-source="post: 409269" data-attributes="member: 4300"><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'"><span style="color: #000000">I understand what you're doing by manipulating stats. I thought I conveyed this in my previous post but let me spell out what you apparently don't understand: When you removed those two Packers games as aberrations because they were against "2 of the worst teams" and then declared without them, the Packers "are averaging 9th worst in scoring which is good enough to be tied with the Chiefs and right behind the Rams", you failed to manipulate the stats of the other teams in the league in a similar manner. For example, what about <em>their</em> games against the worst scoring teams in the NFL? If it makes sense to throw out "aberrations" for the Packers as you rank them <em>against other teams</em>, what about the influence on the stats of other teams' games against Seattle, Washington, Cleveland, Kansas City, Indianapolis, St. Louis, and Jacksonville, all of whom are averaging less than 17 points per game? </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'"><span style="color: #000000">Furthermore, in order for the comparison to make sense, you have to go through the <em>entire</em> NFL schedule and throw out <em>any and all</em> the games you view as aberrations for other teams whether or not they were against low-scoring teams. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'"><span style="color: #000000">The Packers are averaging allowing 20.6 points per game. The two games you want to exclude as aberrations are 17.6 and 13.6 points fewer than their average. If you are going to do that, why not exclude the games against the Chargers and the Saints, 17.4 and 13.4 points higher than their average? All four games are similar in deviation from the norm, aren't they? IOW, the two deviations above the norm would make a "huge difference in our PPG", basically offsetting the "huge difference" you cited. But if you do that, you have to exclude such games for all the other teams if you want to fairly compare the Packers to them. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'"><span style="color: #000000">Instead of doing all that work why not just recognize reality and use the actual statistics? And if you can't…</span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TJV, post: 409269, member: 4300"] [FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#000000]I understand what you're doing by manipulating stats. I thought I conveyed this in my previous post but let me spell out what you apparently don't understand: When you removed those two Packers games as aberrations because they were against "2 of the worst teams" and then declared without them, the Packers "are averaging 9th worst in scoring which is good enough to be tied with the Chiefs and right behind the Rams", you failed to manipulate the stats of the other teams in the league in a similar manner. For example, what about [I]their[/I] games against the worst scoring teams in the NFL? If it makes sense to throw out "aberrations" for the Packers as you rank them [I]against other teams[/I], what about the influence on the stats of other teams' games against Seattle, Washington, Cleveland, Kansas City, Indianapolis, St. Louis, and Jacksonville, all of whom are averaging less than 17 points per game? [/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#000000]Furthermore, in order for the comparison to make sense, you have to go through the [I]entire[/I] NFL schedule and throw out [I]any and all[/I] the games you view as aberrations for other teams whether or not they were against low-scoring teams. [/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#000000]The Packers are averaging allowing 20.6 points per game. The two games you want to exclude as aberrations are 17.6 and 13.6 points fewer than their average. If you are going to do that, why not exclude the games against the Chargers and the Saints, 17.4 and 13.4 points higher than their average? All four games are similar in deviation from the norm, aren't they? IOW, the two deviations above the norm would make a "huge difference in our PPG", basically offsetting the "huge difference" you cited. But if you do that, you have to exclude such games for all the other teams if you want to fairly compare the Packers to them. [/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#000000]Instead of doing all that work why not just recognize reality and use the actual statistics? And if you can't…[/COLOR][/FONT] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
gopkrs
Latest posts
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
51 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
The Crew - 2026
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 10:10 AM
Milwaukee Brewers Forum
M
Prior to Training Camp - Predicting the 53 Man Roster
Latest: mradtke66
Today at 9:57 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
R
Valuation of NFL Teams
Latest: rmontro
Today at 9:42 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
R
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
Latest: rmontro
Today at 9:39 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
This team vs the 1997 team
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
