Patriots compared to Cowboys (detailed stat analysis after w

QuiGon · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 99

"observer" wrote in message $0$22427$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
>
> The Patriots, near-losses to the Eagles,
> a team the Cowboys whooped 38-17
> in Philly with McNabb at QB, and the
> Ravens, a team ranked among the bottom-
> dwellers in the league, and no, the Patriots
> aren't riding high, but instead are beginning
> to show some weaknesses.

Good Lord, are we going to start playing this game about "near losses"...?
Any discussion about "near losses" begins and ends with the Dallas game in
Buffalo.

> And, of course, having the game film from
> the Eagles and Ravens and Colts near-wins,
> in addition to 14 days rest rather than 6
> after an emotional Monday night win, those
> factors are bonuses the Cowboys didn't have
> the first time around, but will have were a
> rematch to take place.

Remember back in the late 80's and early 90's when the NFC was dominant and
whomever won the NFCCG would have a laugher of a Super Bowl against the AFC
champs (usually the Buffalo Bills)..? Well, guess what...? Now you're the
Buffalo Bills.

Archived from group: alt>sports>football>pro>dallas-cowboys

observer · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 196

"QuiGon" wrote ...
>
> "observer" wrote ...
> >
> > The Patriots, near-losses to the Eagles,
> > a team the Cowboys whooped 38-17
> > in Philly with McNabb at QB, and the
> > Ravens, a team ranked among the bottom-
> > dwellers in the league, and no, the Patriots
> > aren't riding high, but instead are beginning
> > to show some weaknesses.
>
> Good Lord, are we going to start playing this game about "near losses"...?
> Any discussion about "near losses" begins and ends with the Dallas game in
> Buffalo.

Get back to me when the Cowboys have
-3- near-losses like the Patriots have had,
-2- of them coming quite recently for the
Patriots, one from a bottom-dweller. The
Bills, by the way, won 5 of 7 after their
near-win over the Cowboys, and sport
a 6-6 record for the year.

The Patriots' near-losses have come from
teams with 5-7 (Eagles) and 4-8 (Ravens)
records, with the Ravens losing 5 straight
prior to their near-win over the Patriots.

>
> > And, of course, having the game film from
> > the Eagles and Ravens and Colts near-wins,
> > in addition to 14 days rest rather than 6
> > after an emotional Monday night win, those
> > factors are bonuses the Cowboys didn't have
> > the first time around, but will have were a
> > rematch to take place.
>
> Remember back in the late 80's and early 90's when the NFC was dominant
> and whomever won the NFCCG would have a laugher of a Super Bowl
> against the AFC champs (usually the Buffalo Bills)..? Well, guess what...?
> Now you're the Buffalo Bills.

No, the Dallas Cowboys are the most successful
team in NFL history, and are just now coming
out of their longest playoff winless slump in
their history.

I know, it must come as a shock for many, what
with the impact the ESPN Patriots-backers have
on sports fans, but the facts remain as stated in
the first post in this thread regarding the statistical
near-equivalency of the -2- teams this year.

That information re-presented as follows, with
Dallas leads followed by Patriot leads:

---

Based on stats accessible from the following
websites:

Pro Football Weekly
http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL+Statistics/default.htm

ESPN
http://tinyurl.com/hncnl

First off, according to Jeff Sagarin's latest
rankings, the Patriots have had the 16th tough-
est schedule, the Cowboys have had the 14th
toughest schedule, with the Cowboys playing
more top 10 and top 16 teams than the Patriots:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl07.htm

So, scheduling differences do not give either
team a particular advantage in the following
stat analysis, though if one were willing to
argue about it, it would be the Patriots that
have a slight advantage via a slightly weaker
schedule.

-33- stat categories were analyzed:

o Cowboys lead in -15- categories
o Patriots ahead in -17- categories
o the teams tied in -1- category

---

COWBOYS LEADS (15 of 33 categories)

Red Zone Defense (1)

25. Dallas, 56.7% TD percent allowed
32. New England, 70.8% TD percent allowed

Team Efficiency - Defense (2)

5. Dallas, 4.87 yards allowed per defensive play
10. New England, 4.98 yards allowed per defensive play

Passing Yards per Attempt (3)

1. Dallas, 8.78
2. New England, 8.56

Average Yards per Reception (4)

1. Dallas, 13.3
4. New England, 12.2

Rushing Yards per Game (5)

7. Dallas, 121.4
8. New England, 121.3

Rushing Yards per Attempt (6)

5. Dallas, 4.3
12. New England, 4.1

Average Punt Return (7)

7. Dallas, 10.82
8. New England, 10.77

Punting Net ( Cool

6. Dallas, 40.9
20. New England, 38.4

Passing Yards per Attempt Allowed (9)

6. Dallas, 6.40
10. New England, 6.79

Passer-Rating Allowed (10)

4. Dallas, 72.6
10. New England, 77.0

Average Yards per Reception Allowed (11)

12. Dallas, 10.9
15. New England, 11.3

Sacks (12)

4. Dallas, 33
7. New England, 31

Rushing Yards per Game Allowed (13)

4. Dallas, 85.6
6. New England, 92.8

Rushing Yards per Attempt Allowed (14)

8. Dallas, 3.8
19. New England, 4.1

Field Goal% Allowed (15)

17. Dallas, 81.8%
28. New England, 90.0%

---

PATRIOTS-COWBOYS TIED (1 of 33 categories)

Sacks Allowed

2. New England & Dallas, 16

---

PATRIOTS LEADS (17 of 33 categories)

Red Zone Offense (1)

2. New England, 72.2% TD percent
6. Dallas, 58.1% TD percent

Team Efficiency - Offense (2)

1. New England, 6.41 yards per offensive play
2. Dallas, 6.40 yards per offensive play

Net Turnovers (3)

1. New England, +16
6. Dallas, +7

Yards per Game (4)

1. New England, 425.3
2. Dallas, 390.9

Points per Game (5)

1. New England, 39.1
2. Dallas, 32.9

Passing Yards per Game (6)

1. New England, 304.0
3. Dallas, 269.5

Passer-Rating (7)

1. New England, 121.7
2. Dallas, 107.1

Third Downs Percent 1st Downs Made ( Cool

1. New England, 50.4%
5. Dallas, 48.6%

Average Kickoff Return (9)

2. New England, 26.5 including 2 TDs
21. Dallas, 22.5

Field Goal% (10)

9. New England, 87.5%, including 1/2 from 40-49 yards, 0/0 from 50+ yards
11. Dallas, 87.0%, including 6/6 from 40-49 yards, 2/4 from 50+ yards

Yards per Game Allowed (11)

3. New England, 289.4
8. Dallas, 303.9

Points per Game Allowed (12)

5. New England, 17.4
13. Dallas, 20.7

Passing Yards per Game Allowed (13)

6. New England, 196.6
18. Dallas, 218.3

Third Downs Percent 1st Downs Allowed (14)

5. New England, 33.8%
11. Dallas, 38.8%

Average Kickoff Return Allowed (15)

9. New England, 21.6
18. Dallas, 23.1

Average Punt Return Allowed (16)

9. New England, 7.6
29. Dallas, 12.5

Punting Net Allowed (17)

23. New England, 40.2
30. Dallas, 42.6

---

observer · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 196

"Venger" wrote ...
>
> Winners win.

Dallas Cowboys, 11-1, their best start in
team history. New England Patriots, 12-0,
probably their best start in team history,
too, but they've fallen on some trying times
lately, unable to blow out the Eagles and
Ravens like prognosticators thought they
would. Oh well, I suppose ESPN Patriot
fawning will continue no matter what, and
given the high level it's been at the past
few weeks, it's likely to continue no mat-
ter how the Patriots play.

---

Venger · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 55

observer wrote:
> "Venger" wrote ...
>> Winners win.
>
> Dallas Cowboys, 11-1, their best start in
> team history. New England Patriots, 12-0,
> probably their best start in team history,
> too, but they've fallen on some trying times
> lately, unable to blow out the Eagles and
> Ravens like prognosticators thought they
> would. Oh well, I suppose ESPN Patriot
> fawning will continue no matter what, and
> given the high level it's been at the past
> few weeks, it's likely to continue no mat-
> ter how the Patriots play.

Who are you trying to convince, me? Let their games do the talking.
Talking about the Patriots when they beat us like a stepchild sounds
desperate.

Who cares about ESPN, it's a story and they run with it, they have to
have something to talk about. Dragging it out here constantly makes you
sound like the boy who cried Patriot...

Venger

observer · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 196

"Venger" wrote ...
>
> "observer" wrote ...
> >
> > "Venger" wrote ...
> >>
> >> Winners win.
> >
> > Dallas Cowboys, 11-1, their best start in
> > team history. New England Patriots, 12-0,
> > probably their best start in team history,
> > too, but they've fallen on some trying times
> > lately, unable to blow out the Eagles and
> > Ravens like prognosticators thought they
> > would. Oh well, I suppose ESPN Patriot
> > fawning will continue no matter what, and
> > given the high level it's been at the past
> > few weeks, it's likely to continue no mat-
> > ter how the Patriots play.
>
> Who are you trying to convince, me? Let their games do the talking.
> Talking about the Patriots when they beat us like a stepchild sounds
> desperate.
>
> Who cares about ESPN, it's a story and they run with it, they have to
> have something to talk about. Dragging it out here constantly makes you
> sound like the boy who cried Patriot...

Uh, you may have heard, the Cowboys and
Patriots are favored to meet in the Super
Bowl, and the Patriots are picked to win.
The stats give pause to the notion that the
Patriots are justified in being the favorite,
but -if- you really feel they are, and no one
should express doubts about that, please
do try and convince us that the Patriots are
unbeatable.

If, on the other hand, you see reason to doubt
the Patriots invincibility, feel free to use the
statistical data in this post to support that
stance.

If you simply like to moan about how the
Patriots beat the Cowboys, and that simply
makes all comparisons worthless, I'd be
interested in how you can eliminate every-
thing that's happened since that game, and
pretend that one game makes all compari-
sons futile.

---

MZ · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 130

"James Farrar" wrote in message @4ax.com...
> On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 15:17:32 -0500, "MZ" wrote:
>
>>Which team leads in the relevant one? You know, win-loss record?
>
> Actually, that's irrelevant because the schedules played are not
> identical; hence the W-L record is not necessarily a good predictor of
> what might happen in a potential Super Bowl between the two teams.

It's by far the most reliable one. Especially when you realize that the
overall strength of schedule is roughly the same, and that the Cowboys' loss
was a head to head one.

MZ · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 130

"observer" wrote in message $0$22461$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
>
> "Venger" wrote ...
>>
>> Winners win.
>
> Dallas Cowboys, 11-1, their best start in
> team history. New England Patriots, 12-0,
> probably their best start in team history,
> too, but they've fallen on some trying times
> lately, unable to blow out the Eagles and
> Ravens like prognosticators thought they
> would. Oh well, I suppose ESPN Patriot
> fawning will continue no matter what, and
> given the high level it's been at the past
> few weeks, it's likely to continue no mat-
> ter how the Patriots play.

You don't getr bonus points for blowouts. HTH

Venger · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 55

James Farrar wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 05:18:19 GMT, Venger
> wrote:
>
>> NO STATISTIC CAN INFORM OF THE QUALITY OF
>> THESE TEAMS BETTER THAN DIRECT COMPETITION.
>
> True, but having beaten a team once doesn't guarantee beating them
> again.

They wouldn't bother playing again were that the case. However, Observer
has attempted to argue towards parity of these teams using secondary
measures, when the direct measure is available and it argues against
parity.

Venger

James Farrar · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 15

On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 15:17:32 -0500, "MZ" wrote:

>Which team leads in the relevant one? You know, win-loss record?

Actually, that's irrelevant because the schedules played are not
identical; hence the W-L record is not necessarily a good predictor of
what might happen in a potential Super Bowl between the two teams.

BerwickMiner · Joined: 19 Nov 2007 Posts: 4

On Dec 5, 7:17 am, "MZ" wrote:
> "observer" wrote in message
>
> $0$22413$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > ---
>
> > Based on stats accessible from the following
> > websites:
>
> > Pro Football Weekly
> > http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL+Statistics/default.htm
>
> > ESPN
> > http://tinyurl.com/hncnl
>
> > First off, according to Jeff Sagarin's latest
> > rankings, the Patriots have had the 16th tough-
> > est schedule, the Cowboys have had the 14th
> > toughest schedule, with the Cowboys playing
> > more top 10 and top 16 teams than the Patriots:
> > http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl07.htm
>
> > So, scheduling differences do not give either
> > team a particular advantage in the following
> > stat analysis, though if one were willing to
> > argue about it, it would be the Patriots that
> > have a slight advantage via a slightly weaker
> > schedule.
>
> > -33- stat categories were analyzed:
>
> > o Cowboys lead in -15- categories
> > o Patriots ahead in -17- categories
> > o the teams tied in -1- category
>
> Which team leads in the relevant one? You know, win-loss record?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

lol true

Broncofan · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 17

On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 15:16:51 -0600, "observer"
wrote:

>
>"Justin Pate" wrote ...
>>
>> The Patriots right now are the better team. No excuses
>> or spin, please. We should not act like Packer fans.
>
>The stats don't show a clear superiority by
>either team, but instead show that the Cow-
>boys and Patriots are surprisingly close.
>
>Keep in mind, the Cowboys don't have a pol-
>icy of 'running up the score', so when the Cow-
>boys have dominated a team, they tend to back
>off rather than trying to rub it in the opponent's
>face.
>
>The Patriots, on the other hand, think that wide
>victory margins are good for morale, and as
>such, one wonders what those close games
>(near-losses) versus the Eagles and Ravens
>are doing to their confidence.
>
>Their next opponent, the Steelers, per the Sagarin
>rankings, they've had the weakest schedule this
>season, but with a strong running game and the
>league's leading defense and a strong QB, they
>should have a good shot at pulling off an upset.
>Add to that the recent Patriots' near-losses, and
>I certainly am not convinced that your assertion,
>"the Patriots are the better team" rings true.
>
>---
>
12-0 says hello to your "near losses" Troll.

Vox Veritas · Joined: 14 Nov 2007 Posts: 8

On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 20:14:34 -0600, "observer"
wrote:

>Oh well, I suppose ESPN Patriot
>fawning will continue no matter what, and
>given the high level it's been at the past
>few weeks, it's likely to continue no mat-
>ter how the Patriots play.

I actually hope it does. If they end up winning the Super Bowl, then
it'll prove that all of the attention was warranted. If some other
team wins it, they'll get plenty of attention.

Broncofan · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 17

On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 14:10:35 -0600, "observer"
wrote:

>
>---
>
>Based on stats accessible from the following
>websites:
>
>Pro Football Weekly
> http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL+Statistics/default.htm
>
>ESPN
> http://tinyurl.com/hncnl
>
>First off, according to Jeff Sagarin's latest
>rankings, the Patriots have had the 16th tough-
>est schedule, the Cowboys have had the 14th
>toughest schedule, with the Cowboys playing
>more top 10 and top 16 teams than the Patriots:
> http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl07.htm
>
>So, scheduling differences do not give either
>team a particular advantage in the following
>stat analysis, though if one were willing to
>argue about it, it would be the Patriots that
>have a slight advantage via a slightly weaker
>schedule.
>
>-33- stat categories were analyzed:
>
> o Cowboys lead in -15- categories
> o Patriots ahead in -17- categories
> o the teams tied in -1- category
>
>---
>
>Red Zone Offense
>
> 2. New England, 72.2% TD percent
> 6. Dallas, 58.1% TD percent
>
>---
>
>Red Zone Defense
>
>25. Dallas, 56.7% TD percent allowed
>32. New England, 70.8% TD percent allowed
>
>---
>
>Team Efficiency - Offense
>
> 1. New England, 6.41 yards per offensive play
> 2. Dallas, 6.40 yards per offensive play
>
>---
>
>Team Efficiency - Defense
>
> 5. Dallas, 4.87 yards allowed per defensive play
>10. New England, 4.98 yards allowed per defensive play
>
>---
>
>Net Turnovers
>
> 1. New England, +16
> 6. Dallas, +7
>
>---
>
>Yards per Game
>
> 1. New England, 425.3
> 2. Dallas, 390.9
>
>---
>
>Points per Game
>
> 1. New England, 39.1
> 2. Dallas, 32.9
>
>---
>
>Passing Yards per Game
>
> 1. New England, 304.0
> 3. Dallas, 269.5
>
>---
>
>Passing Yards per Attempt
>
> 1. Dallas, 8.78
> 2. New England, 8.56
>
>---
>
>Passer-Rating
>
> 1. New England, 121.7
> 2. Dallas, 107.1
>
>---
>
>Average Yards per Reception
>
> 1. Dallas, 13.3
> 4. New England, 12.2
>
>---
>
>Sacks Allowed
>
> 2. New England & Dallas, 16
>
>---
>
>Rushing Yards per Game
>
> 7. Dallas, 121.4
> 8. New England, 121.3
>
>---
>
>Rushing Yards per Attempt
>
> 5. Dallas, 4.3
>12. New England, 4.1
>
>---
>
>Third Downs Percent 1st Downs Made
>
> 1. New England, 50.4%
> 5. Dallas, 48.6%
>
>---
>
>Average Kickoff Return
>
> 2. New England, 26.5 including 2 TDs
>21. Dallas, 22.5
>
>---
>
>Average Punt Return
>
> 7. Dallas, 10.82
> 8. New England, 10.77
>
>---
>
>Field Goal%
>
> 9. New England, 87.5%, including 1/2 from 40-49 yards, 0/0 from 50+ yards
>11. Dallas, 87.0%, including 6/6 from 40-49 yards, 2/4 from 50+ yards
>
>---
>
>Punting Net
>
> 6. Dallas, 40.9
>20. New England, 38.4
>
>---
>
>Yards per Game Allowed
>
> 3. New England, 289.4
> 8. Dallas, 303.9
>
>---
>
>Points per Game Allowed
>
> 5. New England, 17.4
>13. Dallas, 20.7
>
>---
>
>Passing Yards per Game Allowed
>
> 6. New England, 196.6
>18. Dallas, 218.3
>
>---
>
>Passing Yards per Attempt Allowed
>
> 6. Dallas, 6.40
>10. New England, 6.79
>
>---
>
>Passer-Rating Allowed
>
> 4. Dallas, 72.6
>10. New England, 77.0
>
>---
>
>Average Yards per Reception Allowed
>
>12. Dallas, 10.9
>15. New England, 11.3
>
>---
>
>Sacks
>
> 4. Dallas, 33
> 7. New England, 31
>
>---
>
>Rushing Yards per Game Allowed
>
> 4. Dallas, 85.6
> 6. New England, 92.8
>
>---
>
>Rushing Yards per Attempt Allowed
>
> 8. Dallas, 3.8
>19. New England, 4.1
>
>---
>
>Third Downs Percent 1st Downs Allowed
>
> 5. New England, 33.8%
>11. Dallas, 38.8%
>
>---
>
>Average Kickoff Return Allowed
>
> 9. New England, 21.6
>18. Dallas, 23.1
>
>---
>
>Average Punt Return Allowed
>
> 9. New England, 7.6
>29. Dallas, 12.5
>
>---
>
>Field Goal% Allowed
>
>17. Dallas, 81.8%
>28. New England, 90.0%
>
>---
>
>Punting Net Allowed
>
>23. New England, 40.2
>30. Dallas, 42.6
>
>---
>

Observer, due to your constant thread jacking (hijacking) complaints
are being sent your provider.

I implore everyone here to do the same. Send your complaints to

abuse@athenanews.com

Thread jacking is considered a violation of service agreements.

Please inform his provider of his constant thread jacking.

Thank you.

James Farrar · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 15

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 05:18:19 GMT, Venger
wrote:

>NO STATISTIC CAN INFORM OF THE QUALITY OF
>THESE TEAMS BETTER THAN DIRECT COMPETITION.

True, but having beaten a team once doesn't guarantee beating them
again.

Preacher · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 50

Venger wrote:
> James Farrar wrote:
>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 05:18:19 GMT, Venger
>> wrote:
>>
>>> NO STATISTIC CAN INFORM OF THE QUALITY OF THESE TEAMS BETTER THAN
>>> DIRECT COMPETITION.
>>
>> True, but having beaten a team once doesn't guarantee beating them
>> again.
>
> They wouldn't bother playing again were that the case. However, Observer
> has attempted to argue towards parity of these teams using secondary
> measures, when the direct measure is available and it argues against
> parity.

I can only assume that at some point in the past, Belicheck or one of
his players must've praised God after a victory.