If you read how they developed it, they started with each team's Vegas win projection and then added other variables like offensive/defensive efficiency the previous year, number of returning starters, etc. There are two problems with doing that. First, the extra variables may not be predictive at all. There are tests for predictive power, but they're super easy to abuse, even unintentionally. Second, Vegas odds may already take those variables into account. Which means ESPN would be double counting them. Then I read something like this. BB: ESPN's models are completely nonarbitrary. In other words, we're not deciding what to include in the model or how much to weigh each input based on our own opinions about how football works. We let the data speak for itself. For advanced statistically minded folks, I'd like to reassure them how rigorous the model is under the hood. It was built with cross-validated data sets and fully respects the uncertainties and covariance among the inputs. Brian Burke's quote doesn't reassure me. The opposite in fact. When you make a model, you're supposed to factor in your prior opinions. Letting the data speak for itself without context makes it hard if not impossible to tell which patterns in the data are meaningful and which are random noise. So if I had to put my money on the line, I'd bet on Vegas odds over ESPN's model every time. I'm sure Vegas odds have their own problems, but I'd rather go with one set of problems than a model that combines Vegas's problems with a bunch of new ones.
Hey, why don't we play all 16 games and find out for sure how good or bad all the teams are? Am I out of line with that crazy, outlandish suggestion? The sports world has become so infatuated with numbers and analytics-based projections that people actually pay attention to bullshit projections and stats like this latest brainstorm from ESPN. I wonder what they'll do next, projections based on a ouija board?
The funny thing is that a bounce here and there, a called back ASJ TD or three, and maybe no McCown injury and the Jets might have actually made the playoffs last year. They weren't "that" far away from it. Seems to me they are going to be as good or better going forward. It's not like the 2018 Jets should be considered a force to be reckoned with or anything but I'd almost bet the farm they won't be worst in the league.
I'm not exactly sure they're the worst team in the league but either way it's close? The Jets defense was ranked 25th in the league last season and there's no reason to think they'll be any better this season. Sure, they got better in the secondary by adding Trumaine Johnson but they got equally WORSE on the DL. For all the improvement the secondary might show, the front 7 is going to bleed yards on the ground. This defense, if anything, is going to be WORSE overall than last season. On offense, this team will not be any better than last season. So all things considered, I'm not certain ESPN is correct, but they're not far off on this team. Our front office sucks and the sooner fans realize that, the sooner they'll realize what needs to happen to fix it.
The gap between the worst NFL team and the best NFL team is a lot smaller than the gap between the worst NFL team and the best college team.
Even Chris and Woody the most clueless owners in the NFL will realize that ...and that's when the game is up for Bowles and Mac One of them won't last the 2018 Season is my prediction
Teddy tends to talk positive when it comes to the Jets. He had some good comments last year when they got Adams. Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
It's not even just that. While most of us are fairly optimistic that the Jets have improved not many expect the team to seriously contend. Does anyone think the Bills or Fish will either? That basically gives the Pats the division. There's a good chance they are #1 or 2 AFC seed along with it. It doesn't necessarily mean that they are the best team in the NFL, just that - if you have to put a name to a SB contender at this stage - there's a lot of evidence to suggest that the Pats will be... unfortunately.
I read the entire article about how they constructed the ratings, I have no problem with it at all. It comes with no guarantees, and I'm okay with that too. You made the statement that it sucks - would you honestly say the same if the Jets were number 12 rather than 32?
I hate to admit it, but it does appear that ESPN put in some thorough, meticulous research to determine that the Jets are indeed the worst team in the NFL. In fact, stalwart reporter Stephen A. Smith put in over 100 hours of research determining that the Jets will be the least effective team in 2018 on second chance field goals. How can a team that misses a field goal on third down, and then misses the retry on fourth down, possibly going to excel?
It’s a fair point, we should have addressed the second-chance kicker roster spot early in the NFL Draft. I firmly believe that, if we hadn’t traded the second round picks to move up, we would have our second chance kicker right now. We’ll have to address this early in free agency next year.
