I didn't realize the Jets had "overachieved" THIS far as to what some were expecting...Pretty funky read: http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/40-percent-of-the-nfl-is-real/?ref=yfp
I wonder how much of the Pats overachievement rating has to do with the preseason assumption that Brady wasn't going to play a quarter of the season?
i also wonder how much of the Jets overachievement rating was done with the assumption that Geno was going to be our starter?
I am glad the Jets are good! It makes the games so much more exciting and fun to watch. I mean last Sunday's game felt like a playoff game in week 7!!! That's AWESOME!!
the games have been very close for years, even when the Jets were talentless. i'm looking forward to actually beating the P*ts again. have lost the last 3 by such narrow margins, including a game where we actually doubled the TOP.
True, but Sunday felt different, while the other games were close this felt like 2 very good teams duking it out.
i saw it as another good effort that unfortunately (for the Jets) came up short. we've had closer games than even this, and with less talent. So while i do see growth with the team, the P*ts game was not a good measuring stick of that growth. ^ u come of age when you get over the hump, and start winning these games.
Let's just get by the Raiders with all the injuries we have. We can think about how good this team really is when they win their first game under duress. They'll be under duress on Sunday.
have to beat the P*ts, and have to beat the Giants, imo to make this season successful. the Giants in particular, i want to embarrass. pass on the torch of NY media negativity.... they've been getting a free pass for awhile, but a smack down by the Jets should end that pass, and keep the media's attention squarely on them. would also end Coughlin, although i'd rather he stay there while they continue to suck. and in no way could i consider a season getting swept by the Pats as successful. that rematch at home is a must win.
Ah, yes, good point, I hadn't thought of that. I'd add to that the expectation that OL would be mediocre. I certainly expected the OL to perform worse than it has. It that a sign of talent? Coaching? Or is Fitz making them look good? (I doubt it is number three.) As an aside, I think losing Geno wasn't as big a loss as losing Brady would've been for the Pats. I'm going out on a limb there, I know...... Yea, article doesn't really make it clear. I wish they had done a better job explaining how they compiled those numbers. As it is, it was pretty basic, but still very interesting. Thanks for posting!
It pisses me off that I keep missing the games this season. The only game I've gotten to see all of was the Iggles loss. What a bummer.....
That's a good point. It seems the Pats are ranking highly here because they've accumulated a HUGE number of points in this system--they are very far ahead of everyone else unless I missed something. I think what bothers me is that if you compare the preseason scoring to the in season scoring the Pats really stand out as an outlier. They've performed well, but not THAT well. At least not IMO.
