Do the Patriots have a bye before the play us EVERY YEAR?

[Mr. WEO]

"Mathematic Coincidence"? What odds do you need to see the possibility (that's all it is, since none of us were there) that there's something more than coincidence here? Personally, when the odds get over 200 to 300 to 1, my spidey-sense goes off, but that may just be me.

 

Further food for thought. The odds of getting us after the bye each year are actually worse than 8 to 1 when one considers that teams like the Bills who play the Cheats* twice a year are much more likely to play them at least once (or, like last year and some prior years (2003?), both times) in non-bye eligible weeks, making the odds each year that we get them after a bye at probably between 9 to 1 and 10 to 1. So, really the odds of that happening 4 years in a row "naturally" are more on the order of 6,000 to 1 or 10,000 to 1. I'd like one of you to debunk the math--I'm open to being wrong on the odds here, but you'll need to prove that to me and none of you has yet.....

 

Similarly, I must also admit that nothing I've seen above has convinced me that there's little to no chance that the Pats* don't have some influence or say on who they get after a bye. Whether it be a division game (again, we got 1 in 11 years, for ex.) or against another top team or rival (interesting that the years before they got them off a bye, the Pats* had been humiliated by each of the Steelers and Ravens, for ex.), they seem to get meaningful games after a bye, the kind of games one would want after a bye more often than randomness would suggest....

 

 

Each year?? It hasn't happened in 5 years!!

 

You say the pats get a bye before "meaningful games" after a bye, yet the topic is about them getting them the Bills after a bye--a team they have completely owned for the last 10 years, bye or no bye. They've beaten us 15 of the last 16 times--only 4 of those were after a bye.

 

If there is some scheme by the league to pair the pats with the Bills after a pats bye, what is the point?? They clearly haven't benefitted from this "special treatment".

 

And why do you keep harping on "natural odds"? The schedule isn't something that is fed into a random number generator. A bunch of guys sit around and make it up--this is news to you??

Edited April 19, 2012 by Mr. WEO

[PDaDdy]

No wonder you are so smart, I mention the idea of reading about something that is actually quite fascinating and I'm the a******. If you don't want to look it up then just say so. The notion that you would prefer my explanation to doing some of your own fact finding says it all.

 

Riiiight. What I am doing is giving you a forum to explain how this whole thread is useless by educating me to how mathematical coincidence explains this all away. I'm not a statistics or math major. I don't want to guess or infer what your point is which is why I asked you to enlighten me.

 

So, here is your chance to explain your stated opinion. Remember, if you can't explain something simply, you probably don't understand it that well. The fact that you dodged the question in the way you did makes it seem very suspicious.

[OCinBuffalo]

Each year?? It hasn't happened in 5 years!!

 

You say the pats get a bye before "meaningful games" after a bye, yet the topic is about them getting them the Bills after a bye--a team they have completely owned for the last 10 years, bye or no bye. They've beaten us 15 of the last 16 times--only 4 of those were after a bye.

 

If there is some scheme by the league to pair the pats with the Bills after a pats bye, what is the point?? They clearly haven't benefitted from this "special treatment".

 

And why do you keep harping on "natural odds"? The schedule isn't something that is fed into a random number generator. A bunch of guys sit around and make it up--this is news to you??

Well, per my words in your sig....here we are...talking in terms of reason, data, and fact....and here they are, once again, talking in terms of emotion, wishful thinking, and delusion.

 

Let the hazing continue.

 

Remember, if you can't explain something simply, you probably don't understand it that well.

Yeah....I'll remember that the next time I go into a client and am tasked with explaining why the F ups in how their chart of accounts are set up, are causing supply chain problems, which in turn are causing inventory shortages at the point of sale/care...while I am fighting a 2 front political war against the CFO who is trying to cover his ass for the crappy state of the COA, and 2 operations ladies, who are trying save their asses from having their excuses for non-delivery taken away.

 

"As long as I can explain it simply"....

[NoSaint]

Each year?? It hasn't happened in 5 years!!

 

You say the pats get a bye before "meaningful games" after a bye, yet the topic is about them getting them the Bills after a bye--a team they have completely owned for the last 10 years, bye or no bye. They've beaten us 15 of the last 16 times--only 4 of those were after a bye.

 

If there is some scheme by the league to pair the pats with the Bills after a pats bye, what is the point?? They clearly haven't benefitted from this "special treatment".

 

And why do you keep harping on "natural odds"? The schedule isn't something that is fed into a random number generator. A bunch of guys sit around and make it up--this is news to you??

 

although once in 5 years isnt that far off natural.... so truly the bulk of this is thread is based off something that happened years ago

Edited April 19, 2012 by NoSaint

[Matt in KC]

1. I don't think it's random we often play the Pats after their bye week.

 

2. I don't like it that we often play the Pats after their bye week.

 

3. I don't think it helps the Pats that we often play them after their bye week.

3b. I definitely don't think it helps the Bills that we often play the Pats after their bye week.

 

4. I don't think anyone is trying to give a team an advantage in any part of the scheduling.

 

4b. I do think TV ratings are considered in the scheduling, but don't ask me how this comes to bear.

 

 

If I could choose, I'd want to play a team we're evenly matched with, or a slight underdog after our bye week. Ideally it would not be after their bye week, and they'd be flying cross country coming up to the Bils game.

[MattM]

Each year?? It hasn't happened in 5 years!!

 

You say the pats get a bye before "meaningful games" after a bye, yet the topic is about them getting them the Bills after a bye--a team they have completely owned for the last 10 years, bye or no bye. They've beaten us 15 of the last 16 times--only 4 of those were after a bye.

 

If there is some scheme by the league to pair the pats with the Bills after a pats bye, what is the point?? They clearly haven't benefitted from this "special treatment".

 

And why do you keep harping on "natural odds"? The schedule isn't something that is fed into a random number generator. A bunch of guys sit around and make it up--this is news to you??

 

 

Way to miss the point or try to avoid the main mathematical argument. Please explain to me the odds of them playing us 4 years in a row if the schedule were made randomly--if "randomly" (i.e., each game having an equal chance of occurring after a bye) is not how we should look at this, please explain to me why not. As noted above, I've laid out a factor that we can all easily understand that makes it actually less than a 1.8th chance that we get them after a bye in any given year. With the additional factors I laid out above, for ex., I'd say it's about 6,000 to 1 to 10,000 to 1 (1/9th or 1/10th per year by 4 years) that we should play them 4 YEARS IN A ROW after their bye. Also please explain to me why the Pats* seem to get "extra value" games (defined as above as divisional games, quite often against a team THAT YEAR (no revisionist history or hindsight benefit allowed, since the schedule makers wouldn't have that) that was seen to be a potential contender (us in at least 3 of the 5 we played them and the Fins in their other divisional game) or a premium/grudge match opponent (see the Ravens and Steelers the last two years)) after a bye nearly every year. Then we'll talk.....

[CodeMonkey]

Way to miss the point or try to avoid the main mathematical argument. Please explain to me the odds of them playing us 4 years in a row if the schedule were made randomly--if "randomly" (i.e., each game having an equal chance of occurring after a bye) is not how we should look at this, please explain to me why not. As noted above, I've laid out a factor that we can all easily understand that makes it actually less than a 1.8th chance that we get them after a bye in any given year. With the additional factors I laid out above, for ex., I'd say it's about 6,000 to 1 to 10,000 to 1 (1/9th or 1/10th per year by 4 years) that we should play them 4 YEARS IN A ROW after their bye. Also please explain to me why the Pats* seem to get "extra value" games (defined as above as divisional games, quite often against a team THAT YEAR (no revisionist history or hindsight benefit allowed, since the schedule makers wouldn't have that) that was seen to be a potential contender (us in at least 3 of the 5 we played them and the Fins in their other divisional game) or a premium/grudge match opponent (see the Ravens and Steelers the last two years)) after a bye nearly every year. Then we'll talk.....

It is not unusual to see short term anomalies like this. But they generally smooth out when you look at a larger sample, like this has.

Additionally, teams in the AFC east would have a better chance of this happening than non AFCE teams simply because of the fact that they play the Bills twice a season, every season.

 

Bottom line, I know there is not a lot else to talk about right now, but this is a non-issue.

[MattM]

It is not unusual to see short term anomalies like this. But they generally smooth out when you look at a larger sample, like this has.

Additionally, teams in the AFC east would have a better chance of this happening than non AFCE teams simply because of the fact that they play the Bills twice a season, every season.

 

Bottom line, I know there is not a lot else to talk about right now, but this is a non-issue.

 

Unconvinced, and the bolded part is accounted for in my math (see above.) Still looks to me like there's a fairly good chance that the Pats* have input into who they get after their bye. Interesting article in the NYT yesterday about how the schedule is made--skimmed it (no time to read the whole thing yet), but one thing he does note in there is he takes requests from teams with respect to their schedule and one of the big requests is "no teams after a bye".....

[Matt in KC]

Unconvinced, and the bolded part is accounted for in my math (see above.) Still looks to me like there's a fairly good chance that the Pats* have input into who they get after their bye. Interesting article in the NYT yesterday about how the schedule is made--skimmed it (no time to read the whole thing yet), but one thing he does note in there is he takes requests from teams with respect to their schedule and one of the big requests is "no teams after a bye".....

I agree it seems something more than cooincidence is at play here, but why do you think the Pats want to play us after their bye?

 

 

I haven't read it yet, but here's the NY Times article for anyone who's interested: The Art and Science of Scheduling Meet in the N.F.L. Office

[RealityCheck]

Riiiight. What I am doing is giving you a forum to explain how this whole thread is useless by educating me to how mathematical coincidence explains this all away. I'm not a statistics or math major. I don't want to guess or infer what your point is which is why I asked you to enlighten me.

 

So, here is your chance to explain your stated opinion. Remember, if you can't explain something simply, you probably don't understand it that well. The fact that you dodged the question in the way you did makes it seem very suspicious.

If you were to READ about it, you would easily understand it. Are you just being lazy, or are you afraid of learning new things? Whatever I type you will just respond as if I made it all up, but if you look it up yourself (God forbid) you would have the entire mathematical and scientific communities to be at odds with. Your mentality is right in line with why superstitions come into being.

[CodeMonkey]

I agree it seems something more than cooincidence is at play here, but why do you think the Pats want to play us after their bye?

They wouldn't.

[MattM]

Remember that you need to view that not with the benefit of hindsight, knowing how crappy we've turned out to be, but as it would look to the Pats* before the season starts. Looking at it that way, I'd say that at least 4 of the 6 (yes, it's been 6) times they've played us after bye over the last 13 years we were considered the closest challenger to them in the AFCE. As noted above, division games are premium value games because of tie-breakers (and not just "head-to-head" as someone noted above). Of the other 7 games since 2000, one has been against Miami the year after Miami won the division (i.e., they were the Pats* closest competitor) and others were against the Ravens (the year after the Birds destroyed the Cheats* in the playoffs), the Stillers (who hate the Pats*), the Cowboys, Broncos, Panthers and 9ers. As you can see, most of those games, in fact nearly all of those games, are against either division rivals, AFC rivals or good teams that year. To contrast, the Bills have had one bye week game against a division rival (vs. NE's 6) since 2001.

[NoSaint]

Remember that you need to view that not with the benefit of hindsight, knowing how crappy we've turned out to be, but as it would look to the Pats* before the season starts. Looking at it that way, I'd say that at least 4 of the 6 (yes, it's been 6) times they've played us after bye over the last 13 years we were considered the closest challenger to them in the AFCE. As noted above, division games are premium value games because of tie-breakers (and not just "head-to-head" as someone noted above). Of the other 7 games since 2000, one has been against Miami the year after Miami won the division (i.e., they were the Pats* closest competitor) and others were against the Ravens (the year after the Birds destroyed the Cheats* in the playoffs), the Stillers (who hate the Pats*), the Cowboys, Broncos, Panthers and 9ers. As you can see, most of those games, in fact nearly all of those games, are against either division rivals, AFC rivals or good teams that year. To contrast, the Bills have had one bye week game against a division rival (vs. NE's 6) since 2001.

 

Against us the first (or anyone in the AFCe) head to head is first, with division second. The rest (wild card, home field) are conference based. Unless you are talking 3 way ties with us and someone else too, then division is first between us and them. The head to head against a team that's projected close in your conference is ultimately your best bet, and if that's a division rival, great, but I don't think anyone saw us as that team outside this board. Indy, for instance, would have been far more important

 

http://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures

 

Division games are important as its the quickest way to the playoffs. Go 2-0 against someone and you are 3 games up as you have the unconditional tie breaker. It's rare you can beat a team heads up twice but have them get 3 games ahead in the other 14. But to say division record is a highly valuable tie breaker, only occasionally.

Edited April 21, 2012 by NoSaint

[Jim in Anchorage]

This thread is unbelievable.