Maximum Grilled Steelers Forum
Oct 22, 2014 at 01:44 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Calendar Media Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Lack of a "Marquee" Win  (Read 1232 times)
Winters in Holland
Brownstains can suck my Member
****

Karma: -1001
Offline Offline

Posts: 735


« on: Nov 12, 2007 at 05:33 »

I'll preface this by saying that I DO think the Steelers are legit this year, and they WILL give the Colts/Patriots a run in the AFC.  

With that being said, after looking back over their schedule thus far, the Steelers really haven't beaten ANYONE of significance yet.  At the time of many of these games, some of the teams they were playing were presumed better than they turned out to be.  A few people (myself included) thought San Francisco would make a serious challenge in the NFC West, and when Pittsburgh lined up against Baltimore, we thought we were getting a team that would continue to challenge us throughout the remainder of the year, rather than struggle to stay above .500.

But here's a breakdown of the teams we've actually beaten thus far:


Browns (5-4)
Bills (5-4)
49ers (2-6)
Seahawks (4-4)
Bengals (3-6)
Ravens (4-5)
Browns (5-4)

Combined record of teams we've beaten:  28-33

While that's probably not the weakest schedule in the NFL thus far (although it statistically could be after facing the Jets, Dolphins, and Bengals over the next 3 weeks), I'm wagering that we're the only team in the NFL that has not yet faced at least a 6-win team this season.  In fact, this past meeting with Cleveland was only the second time this year we even faced a team that was 2 games over .500 at the time (Seattle being the other).

Our schedule has been really, really easy.

What does that mean so far?  I dunno.  Hopefully nothing- hopefully we can go into New England and line up against Jacksonville, playing them like we really are one of the best teams in the league.  But Pittsburgh better amp up their play in those games, because we really haven't faced anyone on their level yet.


.WiH.
« Last Edit: Nov 12, 2007 at 05:36 by Winters in Holland » Logged

I don't care if Lovie Smith and Tony Dungy are black. Good for them. But that doesn't change the way I feel about them. The longer we keep looking at guys like Tony Dungy and Lovie Smith as "BLACK HEAD COACHES" as opposed to just "coaches" the longer race will continue to be a problem. --DoctorJohnnyFever
Hercules50
Member
***

Karma: 158
Offline Offline

Posts: 407


« Reply #1 on: Nov 12, 2007 at 07:53 »

Definitely a valid point.

I think that Buffalo and Cleveland are two pretty good teams, maybe among the top 12 in the league.

Buffalo is 5-2 when not playing Pittsburgh or New England. (And would be 6-1 if not for a fluky loss to Dallas).

Cleveland is 5-1 when not playing Pitt or NE.

So I think these are two very good, underrated teams, but the point is still true -- let's say this. We haven't beaten a good team which also has a good, seasoned QB. What would we look like playing the Colts, NE, Dallas, or Green Bay?  
Logged
Winters in Holland
Brownstains can suck my Member
****

Karma: -1001
Offline Offline

Posts: 735


« Reply #2 on: Nov 12, 2007 at 09:18 »

I agree.

Honestly, there might not be a single team on that list thus far that makes the playoffs.  

Seattle may win the NFC West, but it will be by default more than anything.

The Steelers have to be the ONLY team in the NFL that have not yet played a probable playoff team.


.WiH.
Logged

I don't care if Lovie Smith and Tony Dungy are black. Good for them. But that doesn't change the way I feel about them. The longer we keep looking at guys like Tony Dungy and Lovie Smith as "BLACK HEAD COACHES" as opposed to just "coaches" the longer race will continue to be a problem. --DoctorJohnnyFever
randylwood
Member
***

Karma: 155
Offline Offline

Posts: 235



WWW
« Reply #3 on: Nov 12, 2007 at 09:26 »

That is a good point.

My rebuttal is that outside of the losses and the close Cleveland game, the Steelers obliterated all of those other teams.

If they were skating by I would be worried, but they are dominating lesser teams for the most part.
Logged

If I could start my life all over again, I would be a professional football player, and you damn well better believe I would be a Pittsburgh Steeler.

- Jack Lambert. HOF induction 1990
 
JackSplat
Jerk Store Proprietor
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 1541
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,311



« Reply #4 on: Nov 12, 2007 at 22:55 »

Im not too concerned about the Marqee win theory.  Like others have mentioned, its not who you play, its how you played them.  Most of the sukahs we have played got their collective asses kicked by the steelers.  the losses on the road has me a tad concerned more than anything.  i think we'll be allright if we get to a position where we have to play only one road playoff game.  lets just hope its not in the divisional round.

I can remember a certain team from back in 94 that only played three playoff teams that year en route to a 11-5 record and making it all the way to the super bowl by beating the #1 seed in the AFC in their house.  This team went 1-2 against those playoff teams during the Reg season with the lone victory coming against the AFCs #1 seed who already clinched homefield throughout prior.  The rest of the teams played by this team were a combined 74-102 and lost 3 of them FFS.

as long as momentum is kept up and you beat who your suppose to beat convincingly, we'll be allright.  its when the "shakey" wins start happening will there be cause for some concern.
Logged

Jerry, it's Frank Costanza, Mr.
Steinbrenner is here, George is dead, call me back!
pensodyssey
Halfsharkalligator halfman.
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 8122
Online Online

Posts: 9,727



« Reply #5 on: Nov 12, 2007 at 23:38 »

This type of SOS stuff is statistically misleading.  You need to back the 7-2 steelers mark out of the tally because the point is to measure against "neutral" opponents.

In other words, in games not involving the Steelers, our opponents are 27-27 (counting tonight's game), or .500.  Which is about what you'd expect for the schedule of a team coming off an 8-8 season, no?

You play the slate you're given.
« Last Edit: Nov 12, 2007 at 23:52 by pensodyssey » Logged

A shabby Charlie Brown.
jonzr
Asst. VP, Jonzring
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 11363
Offline Offline

Posts: 11,584


Have a cup o' joe.


WWW
« Reply #6 on: Nov 12, 2007 at 23:56 »

Name the significant teams and who beat 'em.  

 
Logged

"I like David Bowie, he was always my favorite member of Tin Machine."
- Rodney Anonymous

It's a Steeler Nation
pensodyssey
Halfsharkalligator halfman.
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 8122
Online Online

Posts: 9,727



« Reply #7 on: Nov 13, 2007 at 08:35 »

Here are the regular and my so-called neutral SOS numbers for the other top AFC teams:

Pasties (9-0)-- 39-42; neutral 39-33
Indy (7-2)-- 47-34; neutral 45-27
Pittsburgh (7-2)-- 37-44; neutral 35-37
Jax (6-3)-- 43-38; neutral 40-32
SD (5-4)-- 45-36; neutral 41-31
Cle (5-4)-- 38-43; neutral 34-38


So perhaps we are only the fifth best team in the AFC?  Certainly Jacksonville's numbers are better than ours, and San Diego, while two games back of us, has played a schedule that's 6 games stronger.


 
Logged

A shabby Charlie Brown.
jburghfan
Brownstains can suck my Member
****

Karma: 223
Offline Offline

Posts: 855


« Reply #8 on: Nov 13, 2007 at 10:18 »

What do we need a "Marquee" win for.....BCS points?


 
Logged
LambertsFrontTeeth
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 1617
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,462



« Reply #9 on: Nov 13, 2007 at 10:44 »

I believe there is another potential complication with those numbers...

The numbers don't take into account the effect of each individual's team's division and the quality of those divisional opponents' diminished value PLAYING EACH OTHER as relates to the (neutral) SOS score.

Okay, to explain:

SOS for Colts would include 4 of the games for the opponents were those divisional opponents playing each other (so far):

   Jax vs Ten (1), Jax vs Ten (2), Ten vs Hous, Hous vs. Jax

Regardless of who wins, you get 4 wins and 4 losses added to the Colts SOS score.  Here is the problem. There is a big difference between having Jax Ten and Houston (none terrible) playing each other , and giving the corresponding 4 SOS wins/4 SOS losses to the Colts, while the Patriots play a group of shitty teams like Miami, Jets and the marginally better Buffalo club that give the same SOS 4 wins, 4 losses.

Just assume that all of these divisional games occurred prior to interdivisional games.  Both the Colts and the Patriots would be unbeaten, and both teams SOS score would be 4-4.  Which 4-4 would YOU be more impressed with? Shitty AFC East 4-4? Or pretty decent AFC South 4-4?

SOS computation simply won't reflect that the AFC East is filled with, well, patsies, and that the AFC South, most would agree, is much, much better.  Although the Colts and the Patriots may both be unbeaten by their respective division opponents, the Colts' wins are not quantifiably more impressive than the Patriots are, although qualitatively most would agree: it is much harder to beat the AFC South opponents than it is the East.

I guess one could argue that we still get value delivered for the total performance of those opponents, but, since teams play divisional opponents twice....I still find SOS lacking.

But I'm no statistician, so I'm sure my logic is fucked up somehow.



 
Logged

"Dreith said I hit Sipe too hard. I hit him as hard as I could. Brian has a chance to go out of bounds and he decides not to. He knows I'm going to hit him. And I do. History."
- - - Jack Lambert, after referee Ben Dreith ejected him from a game for knocking out Browns QB Brian Sipe.
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal
| Sitemap
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!