I think we are biased (2 Viewers)

Previous Next
Cam71090 said:
Again, this was my argument. People will use the who have they beaten argument on this board all the time. Do those people know that statistically we have the easiest schedule in the NFL so far? Biases and convenient oversights like that make for non-credible people.
Click to expand...

We've played Carolina twice, you don't need a calculator to figure this out.
 
I think the ratings of my posts prove that we are biased. If i would have posted something blindly positive everyone would have agreed, but when i post something, not even negative, just unarguably factual, and it doesnt necessarily defend the belief that we are the best in everything everyone starts getting upset and thumbs down happy. It takes an immature person to only feel comfortable hearing things they like.
 
Cam71090 said:
I think the ratings of my posts prove that we are biased. If i would have posted something blindly positive everyone would have agreed, but when i post something, not even negative, just unarguably factual, and it doesnt necessarily defend the belief that we are the best in everything everyone starts getting upset and thumbs down happy. It takes an immature person to only feel comfortable hearing things they like.
Click to expand...

Every team in the division plays the same schedule except for four games. We've played Carolina twice and Seattle compared to Atlanta playing TB twice and Baltimore. Maybe you do need a calculator.

Like a previous poster mentioned, Dallas when we played them was a different team than earlier, unless you want to ignore the fact that they have a different head coach. Minnesota wasn't in shambles at the beginning of the year either.
 
Wingdog said:
Every team in the division plays the same schedule except for four games. We've played Carolina twice and Seattle compared to Atlanta playing TB twice and Baltimore. Maybe you do need a calculator.

Like a previous poster mentioned, Dallas when we played them was a different team than earlier, unless you want to ignore the fact that they have a different head coach. Minnesota wasn't in shambles at the beginning of the year either.
Click to expand...
Do you refuse to comprehend that the whole point of this thread, as i have clarified three times, was to point out that im tired of hearing people say that a teams record is misleading because they havent played anybody? You cant apply that logic to other teams and not us. All or none. Otherwise you are just a hypocritical, biased, moronic fan. I have higher expectations for this board.
 
Cam71090 said:
Do you refuse to comprehend that the whole point of this thread, as i have clarified three times, was to point out that im tired of hearing people say that a teams record is misleading because they havent played anybody? You cant apply that logic to other teams and not us. All or none. Otherwise you are just a hypocritical, biased, moronic fan. I have higher expectations for this board.
Click to expand...

Let me make it easy for you, every time Carolina loses, it counts against us twice as far as strength of schedule.

We have beaten 2 out of 3 teams that are over .500 and beat them decisively. We should be 3 for 3. We let a couple teams hang around when we should have blown them out (Cowboys, Bengals). We showed a few teams they are not in the same class as us (Rams, Seahawks). We also overlooked two teams (Cards, Browns), but that was six games ago.

There is only one team playing elite football the past couple of weeks and that is the Pats.
 
Cam71090 said:
Again, this was my argument. People will use the who have they beaten argument on this board all the time. Do those people know that statistically we have the easiest schedule in the NFL so far? Biases and convenient oversights like that make for non-credible people.
Click to expand...

Again, my argument is that any stat can be biased and full of convenient oversights. GI/GO.

Injuries/health, suspensions, home/away, personel/coaching changes, hot streaks, days between games, bye week/opp. bye week, and so on are not reflected in general stats like SOS. There also really not mch different between schedules in the NFL like in college.

However, as a person who watches NFL football, you would think you would be aware of these trends and games within games and be able to analyze accordingly.

FYI, Saints played the weakest schedule last year too as do many champions across many different leagues. Tell that to the Colts, Vikings, and Cardinals as if it mattered much.

As far as being biased, the title of the forum is a heck of a metric to explain that.
 
I'd also like to point out that Dallas is WAY better than they're ranking.. They took out the Giants, and the Colts, after they got hot, and we still beat them.

The Steelers were hot, and we beat the crap out of them..

Atlanta is playing great this season.. We SHOULD have beat them.. It's a loss on the record, but, we had that game.

We went up and played the Bengals in freezing cold weather.. beat them..

Now, we face another challenge.. I don't think our schedule has been "easy", by any means.

Travis
 
i give up. People are literally responding to the opposite of what im saying.

Me:people really shouldnt say that teams arent good cause they have weak schedules
People in this thread: the problem with your argument is you cant judge a teams prowess by their SOS
Me: Agreed. If you could, we would not be good. We are. We shouldnt use the, the teams you play arent good argument for other teams. Its a biased argument.
People in this thread: How many times do i have to say that SOS doesnt tell you everything?
Me: Zero times. You could read what im saying and realize thats the bases of my entire argument.
People in this thread: Let me say this one more time....
Me: Bangs head against wall


Other people in the thread: Hey, this post doesnt contain
A)the words Who Dat
B)Reasons we are the best
C)reasons the Falcons are not good
D)Something about us being disrespected by the media

Im going to thumbs down it and start attacking.


My god the quality of the posters on this board, and their ability to remove their fanatical glasses and have a football conversation goes down with every win. Give and take i suppose.
 
Cam71090 said:
i give up. People are literally responding to the opposite of what im saying.

Me:people really shouldnt say that teams arent good cause they have weak schedules
People in this thread: the problem with your argument is you cant judge a teams prowess by their SOS
Me: Agreed. If you could, we would not be good. We are. We shouldnt use the, the teams you play arent good argument for other teams. Its a biased argument.
People in this thread: How many times do i have to say that SOS doesnt tell you everything?
Me: Zero times. You could read what im saying and realize thats the bases of my entire argument.
People in this thread: Let me say this one more time....
Me: Bangs head against wall


Other people in the thread: Hey, this post doesnt contain
A)the words Who Dat
B)Reasons we are the best
C)reasons the Falcons are not good
D)Something about us being disrespected by the media

Im going to thumbs down it and start attacking.


My god the quality of the posters on this board, and their ability to remove their fanatical glasses and have a football conversation goes down with every win. Give and take i suppose.
Click to expand...


Calling people biased and attacking them just because they don't agree with you don't really promote a good discussion. Even though people may not respond the way you want doesn't mean we can't have a good discussion about stats and the different way they can be interpreted (and misinterpreted)

Also - a lot of the threads using stats as arguments are weighted with actual information as well underscoring the arguments. It is not just saying team x is 6-2 but saying they are 6-2 but they beat 2 teams who had major injuries and another 3 teams who are not very good and rebuilding. In a case like that it can be argued "that a team hasn't beaten anybody yet". Look at last year - Giants started hot with a lot of easy opponents, but when they hit the tougher opponents - they folded. In order to use stats you always need to keep the bigger picture in mind as well
 
No, I agree. The schedule we've played so far is very weak. We played the NFC West and Carolina twice. To spin it any other way is ridiculous. I think we're good and are getting better, but we'll see over the next few weeks when we play a very difficult schedule.
 
Cam71090 said:
i give up. People are literally responding to the opposite of what im saying.

Me:people really shouldnt say that teams arent good cause they have weak schedules
People in this thread: the problem with your argument is you cant judge a teams prowess by their SOS
Me: Agreed. If you could, we would not be good. We are. We shouldnt use the, the teams you play arent good argument for other teams. Its a biased argument.
People in this thread: How many times do i have to say that SOS doesnt tell you everything?
Me: Zero times. You could read what im saying and realize thats the bases of my entire argument.
People in this thread: Let me say this one more time....
Me: Bangs head against wall


Other people in the thread: Hey, this post doesnt contain
A)the words Who Dat
B)Reasons we are the best
C)reasons the Falcons are not good
D)Something about us being disrespected by the media

Im going to thumbs down it and start attacking.


My god the quality of the posters on this board, and their ability to remove their fanatical glasses and have a football conversation goes down with every win. Give and take i suppose.
Click to expand...

To be fair, not everyone around here has been complaining about teams being lucky or their record being deceptive. This feels like an Atlanta thread is sheep's clothing. That my friend is why you're getting flamed.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Previous Next

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)

    Share this page

     

    Twitter

    Back
    Top Bottom