If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
All: The new Billszone site with the updated software is scheduled to be turned on Tuesday, May 21, 2024. The company that built it, Dynascale, estimates a FOUR HOUR shut down, from 8pm Pacific, (5pm Eastern) while they get it up and running. Nobody will be able to post in any forum until they are done. Afterwards, you may need to do a web search for the site, as old links will not work, because the site is getting a new IP address. Please be patient. If there are bugs, we will tackle them one at a time. Remember the goal is to be up and running with no glitches by camp. Doing this now assures us of that, because it gives us all summer to get our ducks in a row. Thank you!
Please use this thread to report any issues you come across
http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/forum/feedback-forums/billszone-q-a/6521455-upgrade-report-bugs-here
Can you believe that the Bears had the easiest schedules last year and they still went to the superbowl? Do you think that Buffalo is as bad as some of you think they are with the hardest schedule last year? We only got blown out by the Bears.
2007 Draft Order
Pick
Team
Record
Strength of schedule
1.
Oakland
2-14
.555
2.
Detroit
3-13
.479
3.
Cleveland
4-12
.535
4.
Tampa Bay
4-12
.535
5.
Arizona
5-11
.500
6.
Washington
5-11
.512
7.
Minnesota
6-10
.539
8.
Houston
6-10
.500
9.
Miami
6-10
.504
10.
Atlanta
7-9
.457
11.
San Francisco
7-9
.500
12.
Buffalo
7-9
.574
13.
St. Louis
8-8
.465
14.
Carolina
8-8
.473
15.
Pittsburgh
8-8
.496
16.
Green Bay
8-8
.500
17.
Jacksonville
8-8
.531
18.
Cincinnati
8-8
.535
19.
Tennessee
8-8
.570
20.
N.Y. Giants
8-8
.520
21.
Denver
9-7
.531
22.
Dallas
9-7
.457
23.
Kansas City
9-7
.492
24.
New England (from Seattle)
9-7
.453
25.
N.Y. Jets
10-6
.469
26.
Philadelphia
10-6
.449
27.
New Orleans
10-6
.461
28.
New England
12-4
.496
29.
Baltimore
13-3
.461
30.
San Diego
14-2
.457
31.
Chicago
13-3
.430
32.
Indianapolis
12-4
.500
Where else would you rather be than right here right now?
Just to play devils advocate, -Im not sure SOS should mean that much.
To the 2 extremes: if you're a powerhouse team and winning alot, you'll affect alot of the teams you beat (meaning your SOS will go down, and theirs will go up).
Likewise, if you're a really crappy team (ie Oakland), you bump up your SOS everytime you lose and lower everyone elses SOS.
Take into account you only play a small number of games a year (16), and SOS doesnt look like a very meaningful stat.
Just to play devils advocate, -Im not sure SOS should mean that much.
To the 2 extremes: if you're a powerhouse team and winning alot, you'll affect alot of the teams you beat (meaning your SOS will go down, and theirs will go up).
Likewise, if you're a really crappy team (ie Oakland), you bump up your SOS everytime you lose and lower everyone elses SOS.
Take into account you only play a small number of games a year (16), and SOS doesnt look like a very meaningful stat.
Man Kenny, you really bring a twist to this! As Gr8slayer said, a couple of plays and we go from 7-9 to 10-6 and that is a couple of plays against some really good teams. We will be better next year!
Where else would you rather be than right here right now?
Man Kenny, you really bring a twist to this! As Gr8slayer said, a couple of plays and we go from 7-9 to 10-6 and that is a couple of plays against some really good teams. We will be better next year!
Well, SOS works in college because there are 'true' powerhouses there, and for the most part, not much parity.
But as Gr8slayer mentioned, alot of the games are close (I'd imagine that we're not the only team to win or lose by close games too).
And even the year before last, where we finished 5-11 (or was it 6-10??)... there at least 3 games I can remember that could of went other ways (the ATL, CAR, and INdy games at home).
this is precisely why I am little bit optimistic about the staff we have. Granted they didn't light the league on fire, they kept us close inspite of the strength of schedule and the qb, rb, injury issues they inherited. Not bad for a bad first year for rebuilding team.I also love how our coaches keep saying, "there's a lot of work to be done" unlike TD "we expect playoffs"
They finished about where they should have...lost some tough ones that coulda gone either way and won some tough ones that coulda gone either way. It all averages out.
To say this could have been a 4-12 team is as logical as saying it could have been 10-6. One dropped pass by Minnesota was the difference in that win. A nice last second TD pass from Losman to Price beat the Texans and we beat the Jags on a last second field goal.
Like I said everything averages out in the end over a course of a 16 game schedule and we were a team that wasn't good enough to get over the hump without almost all the breaks going our way. Which showed in the final standings.
All in all it was a good year in a step towards better things. Hopefully we can build on the last season and make strides further towards being competitive.
Man Kenny, you really bring a twist to this! As Gr8slayer said, a couple of plays and we go from 7-9 to 10-6 and that is a couple of plays against some really good teams. We will be better next year!
And if the guy from the Vikings (cant remember his name) doesnt drop a ball wide open for a TD, Price doesnt come down with that catch vs Houston in the final few seconds and Parrish doesnt make a great play late vs the Jags..
Then we're 4-12 last year; 5-7 at best.
Basically, we finished how we deserved last year. WE played some real good teams tough ( Indy, SD)-- we failed to even show up a couple of games (chicago, Detroit, NE#2) and we flat out gave away a couple of games (NE#1 and the NYJ #1)-- Finally we beat most of the teams we're supposed to beat (Houston, Miami twice)
Had we won more games then our SOS would've been lower. Everytime you lose it increases your opponents SOS because their record increases.
Take NE for example. Had we beat them twice instead of losing both games it would've given us 9 wins and knocked the Patriots down to 9 wins. The Patriots winning percentage would've been lower thus lowering our SOS.
And when you're talking about a few percentage points what difference does that make. You played one more team that had 6 wins instead of 4? Big deal.
And if the guy from the Vikings (cant remember his name) doesnt drop a ball wide open for a TD, Price doesnt come down with that catch vs Houston in the final few seconds and Parrish doesnt make a great play late vs the Jags..
Then we're 4-12 last year; 5-7 at best.
Basically, we finished how we deserved last year. WE played some real good teams tough ( Indy, SD)-- we failed to even show up a couple of games (chicago, Detroit, NE#2) and we flat out gave away a couple of games (NE#1 and the NYJ #1)-- Finally we beat most of the teams we're supposed to beat (Houston, Miami twice)
Some people act like we're the only team in the NFL who played close games. Every losing team in the NFL can look back to multiple close games they could've won.
You are what your record is. Just like Pat mentioned, a few close games we were lucky to pull out could've made us 4-12 had we lost them. You can't win every lose game. Good teams don't put themselves in that position and lose them types of games many times a season.
Tweet
Comment