Preseason doesn't matter?

[psubills62]

When Chris Berman was doing his "2 minute drill" segment on Sportscenter tonight, they put up some interesting stats. Considering we heard all offseason from certain people that preseason doesn't matter, I found this correlation to be semi-relevant:

(Note: I may not have the exact numbers right from memory, but they're close)

These numbers are all since 1980

# of teams that have gone 0-4 in preseason: 49
# of said teams that have made the playoffs: 6 (12.2%)

# of teams that have gone 4-0 in preseason: 53
# of said teams that have made the playoffs: 31 (58.5%)


Preseason may not matter, but I'd certainly rather have a good record in preseason than a bad one if that's the correlation.

Thoughts?

[Thief]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

It doesn't count...... but it matters.

[psubills62]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

It doesn't count...... but it matters.

There are some in here who indicated it didn't matter because it was just preseason. This thread was for those people...

[Oaf]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

I KNEW we should have put the starters back in against the Lions.

[Mr. Pink]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

It does matter to fringe players fighting for roster spots. It doesn't matter for established players other than to get some game reps.

According to that I guess the Indianapolis Colts 0-4 this preseason are done for...no playoffs for them!

[paranoid]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

It does matter to fringe players fighting for roster spots. It doesn't matter for established players other than to get some game reps.

According to that I guess the Indianapolis Colts 0-4 this preseason are done for...no playoffs for them!

Actually, according to that they fall within the 12%. Rough correlations do not equate to failsafe predictions.

[Jan Reimers]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

It certainly means something to the Bills, in terms of installing new offensive and defensive systems, establishing a culture of winning, and solidifying problem areas such as the O-line, in addition to evaluating personnel.

[ddaryl]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

great teams have good solid depth, as well as solid coaching and therefore percentage wise should do better in the preseason stats dept.

I was encouraged by our preseason performance, but I think we still won't make the playoffs this season

[mrbojanglezs]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

i never look at the record of the preseason games but the performance of the 1st team certainty does matter

[Mike13]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

It does matter for players fighting for a roster spot, and it helps rookies get some reps in but thats about it.

[Mr. Pink]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

Last year...Dolphins, Ravens both 4-0...Dolphins stayed home...50% Chiefs, Cardinals, Panthers 0-4...Cardinals made playoffs...33%

2008...Lions 4-0, we all know how that worked out for them :rofl Browns, Pats 0-4, no playoffs.

2007...no 4-0 teams, Cardinals and Chiefs 0-4 no playoffs.

2006...Bengals, Giants, Panthers 4-0 only the Giants made the playoffs, on a tiebreaker. Steelers Redskins 0-4 no playoffs.

That's as far back as NFL.com goes on preseason records.

So since 2006, 2 of 6 4-0 preseason teams made the playoffs and 1 of 9 0-4 teams made it.

Pat Kirwan article from 2008 http://www.nfl.com/preseason/story/0...season-success

As you can see not 1 team in 2007 who won their division had a winning preseason in that year.

Last year 4/8 had winning records in the preseason.

2008 4/8 had winning records in the preseason...then the Chargers didn't even have a winning record to win their division in the regular season.

2006 0/8 had winning records.

So since 2006...8/32 division winners had a winning record in preseason.

And since 2006...Superbowl champs combined for an 8-8 record in preseason. Superbowl losers? 7-9 combined preseason.

But yeah...having a strong preseason is a really great indicator of regular season success!

[psubills62]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

But yeah...having a strong preseason is a really great indicator of regular season success!

Wow, what a genius post. You use 4 years worth of data to counter 30 years of data. There's an argument if I ever saw one.

When did anyone say it was a great indicator? All I said was that there seemed to be a correlation, and that's just with 0-4 teams and 4-0 teams. You seem to be great at using leaps in logic when you attempt sarcasm.

[Mr. Pink]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

Wow, what a genius post. You use 4 years worth of data to counter 30 years of data. There's an argument if I ever saw one.

When did anyone say it was a great indicator? All I said was that there seemed to be a correlation, and that's just with 0-4 teams and 4-0 teams. You seem to be great at using leaps in logic when you attempt sarcasm.

Preseason has 0 correlation to what occurs in the regular season.

I used the past 4 years of data because that's all NFL.com would allow me to use. Besides the NFL is a what have you done lately league. Something that occurred in 1980 has zero bearing on what occurs today.

If you want to talk this year...only 4/8 division winners, at best, will have a winning preseason record as well. 3 divisions didn't have a team finish with a winning record and the Oakland Raiders, the only team in the AFCW with a winning preseason, aren't winning the west.

Although I will admit that the 4-0 49ers are winning the NFC West and the 0-4 Bears aren't making the playoffs. Although if you reversed those records, I could make the very same guarantee. The Bears aren't good enough to make the playoffs and no one in the West is good enough to compete with San Fran.

If you can find me data online that shows preseason records all the way back to the Packers winning SB I...I'll do the data all the way through to today.

Last years superbowl winners combined to go 2-6 this preseason. And it's not a far jump to predict that they will play again this February.

Here's your 2010 teams with a winning preseason record...Ravens, Steelers, Bengals, Raiders. 2 of those 4 likely make the playoffs. Which leaves 4 teams in the AFC with a non-winning preseason record make the playoffs. Cowboys, Lions, Vikings, 49ers, Rams, Cardinals in the NFC. 3 of those 6 likely make the playoffs. Which leaves 3 teams with non-winning records to make the playoffs. So, 5 of the 12 playoff teams will have a winning preseason record. Whoopie!

Last year 2 of the 6 AFC playoff teams had a winning preseason. And 3 of 6 of the NFC teams did. Wow...does that look similar! 2008 4 of 6 AFC teams...0 of 6 NFC teams. 2007 4 of 6 AFC...2 of 6 NFC. 2006 0 of 6 AFC teams...2 of 6 NFC.

So out of 5 years of data, including this year, 22 of 60 playoff teams had a winning record in the preseason. Even if you want to say every team in 2010 that had winning records in preseason makes the playoffs that still only makes it 27 of 60. So where is this big correlation that preseason success has any bearing on what you're going to do when the games count?

Although maybe the 49ers and the Raiders will meet in February! They combined to go 7-1 after all. How was that for sarcasm?

[PromoTheRobot]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

It only matters if we suck. If we're good then it's meaningless.


PTR

[psubills62]

Re: Preseason doesn't matter?

Preseason has 0 correlation to what occurs in the regular season.

So where is this big correlation that preseason success has any bearing on what you're going to do when the games count?

The correlation was what I presented in the initial post, which is something you haven't exactly responded to. Would you rather have a team with an 0-4 preseason record or 4-0? It appears that the former has, in general, a better chance at reaching the postseason than those who go 0-4. Obviously there can be exceptions, as the Colts this season should easily prove.

I didn't bother to delve into teams that have winning vs. losing records in preseason, and I really don't care to. The reason why is because in most years, 30-50% of the NFL has a 0.500 record in the preseason: 2-2. That doesn't leave a lot of teams to make conclusions about winning vs. losing records. Especially with the way you present data. With the way you leave out various numbers, it's impossible to get any conclusions at all.

And besides...the data you presented previously on 4-0 teams vs. 0-4 teams shows a similar correlation, though not quite as strong as the one I gave. 33% vs. 11% make the playoffs.

I have as much access to data as you did. I said in the original post that what I am presenting was originally from ESPN. Feel free to call them and get the data you want.

Preseason doesn't have 0 correlation to the regular season. I've always believed that the records don't correlate nearly as well as how the first team played in the preseason. You did watch preseason games under Dick Jauron right? You really want to tell me that how the first team offense and defense played in the preseason wasn't reflected at all in how they did in the regular season? Sure.