I don't see how everyones ready to christen the Ravens as contenders. Thats an old football team that has an astounding lack of depth, and an injury prone QB.
Our schedule is way easier than the teams we beat for the wildcard. The teams we beat had a .465 winning pct and the ones all the other teams played were over 500. We played against 4 teams the whole season that had a record over 500. We played Jacksonville who was 8-8 and considered in the same league as all the other teams who missed the playoffs that I just showed you had a way harder schedule than us and the slaughtered us. There is a huge diff between the .465 we had and the other teams had. Cincy had a .543,Pitt had .531 and Den had .516. If we had their schedule we would have been 6-10 and not 10-6. Don't get me wrong Im glad the team did what it had to do but the reality of the situation is we were beyond lucky. Nobody will take us lightly this year and we have a harder schedule and gaping holes on both sides of the line. Please show me how I am manipulating? I showed you the win pct of the teams that everyone in the league played against and we were almost at the bottom. Well below all the other teams that fought for the wildcard.
We had a .465 going INTO the 2006 season. That was based on 2005 records. What do 2005 records have to do with anything now? The argument is based on SoS at the end of 2006. That alone is manipulation. You can't on the one hand bring up the fact that Cincy had to play the Saints in 2006, then bring up our SoS based on the 2005 season when the Saints were terrible in 2005.
Honestly, I don't understand where you're getting these numbers and if you cannot write paragraphs I'm not going to attempt to decipher your messages anymore. Write paragraphs man. What are these percentages you're talking about for the other wildcard hopeful teams? If they were so good, why didn't they beat the teams they were supposed to like we did? How many teams with winning records did they play?
What can't you understand? I sent you a list of some of the teams that the Bengals, Steelers, Jaguars and Broncos had to play. I also sent the stats for the winning pct of the teams that everyone in the Nfl played against last year. We played against teams with a combined .465 winning pct and the other teams we beat out to get into the playoffs had a combined winning pct over .500. The wildcard teams did not beat the teams they were supposed to beat because they played better teams. What is so hard to understand about that? If we played the teams Cincy, Denver or Pitt played we would not have won. Do you understand we played a bunch of bad teams. Do you understand we only played in 4 games against teams with records over .500? Did you even look at who we played and look at who the other teams played?
Again, this is incorrect. I posted the correct percentages. I don't know where you're getting these inaccurate numbers, but they're wrong! Our opponents actually had a better winning percentage than the other teams you speak of! Not according to the correct percentages. How do you know this? You're opinion is not fact! How many teams did they play over .500? I'm well aware of who we played last year, I watched every game.
I sent the winning pct as of the end of the 2006 season. The teams we played last year had a .465 winning pct and the teams Cincy played had a .543 winning Pct. That .543 was for last year not 2005! We played in 4 last year against teams that were over 500! Indy, Chicago and Ne 2 times. We played a 8-8 Jacksonville team and got destroyed!
Why are you so sure that we would have lost? We played New England tough both games and lost one. We played Chicago and Indy close and they ended up in the Super Bowl. The only games all year that we were out of were the second Buffalo game and the Jacksonville game. The same Jaguars who got swept by Houston. Meanwhile Miami destroyed Chicago and shut out New England last year. Any given Sunday. You can't just assume that we would have fared worse with a different schedule.
whiteshoewillie, i don't know where you got the phony stats and don't need to know. with your stat chart, the jet's had one of the toughest schedules last year. i think everybody on this board that has half a brain knows better. it is well documented, the jets had a light schedule.
It's right here buddy. FOURTHANDLONG is using 2005 percentages. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2830466 Like I explained in my posts and you even see by FOURTHANDLONG's postings, our perceived strength of schedule for 2006 based on 2005 win percentages was very weak. People never forgot about that and thought our schedule was so weak without looking at the facts. The facts are in this thread if you care to read it. edit: BTW if you're going to try and call me out for making shit up, at least have the courtesy to say you fucked up.
ok willie, you f**ked up. and i'm not trying to attack here, but the numbers don't add up. where ever you got those #'s, it must have come from a bogus/phony site or magazine. and i hear what your saying about fourth's stats, they are from the 2005 schedule. now, if you consider that the jets only played 4 teams with .500 or better records, out of 16 games, you can see that is only 1/4 of the schedule of teams with winning records. it's been a while since my school days, but that tells me it is virtually impossible to have the #'s you have on your chart, if 3/4's of the teams the jets played had losing records. i just don't know how your chart figure's out mathematics, because it magical from my schooling...
There are three types of lies: 1. Lies 2. Damn Lies. 3. Statistics We aren't the same old Jets, no really I swear.
Willie my man, you are the one that "choked on a cock" when you used false information. Reading your earlier posts in this thread, it seems to me like you are a huge hypocrit jumping all over that guy that called you out on your mistake.
lol, wow!! i laughed my a$$ off when i first saw your response. you yourself told me not to call you out, but to point out where you were wrong.. this dribble above pretty much explains why you can't get your #'s right.
you're right I am wrong. sorry for being a dick. fourthandlong was also wrong but i made nearly the same mistake. the correct numbers are here. http://forums.theganggreen.com/showpost.php?p=516935&postcount=22
The Point that I was trying to make was that if we used the SOS for last year the Bengals, Jaguars, Broncos and Pitt all had a way harder schedule than us and that played a large part of us making the playoffs. I think that those teams were better than us but because of a harder schedule they did not get in the playoffs. With that said I still think they are better than us this year and we will have a hard way to go to get back in the playoffs.
i think everyone gets where your coming from and i for one believe you are correct. the bengals,broncos and pitt had a weird season last year b/c they are better than what their records were. jags, i'm not so sure about. even though they stomped us. it's like the pat's game last year, any given sunday the better team can lose!!
