Grantland making the case the ravens will regain the throne in the toughest division

[NEPatsfan]

You asked for the playoffs records of that div , but like I said before I'm not like a college fan, beating my chest about a conference SEC !!! Some guys on here are into the Div BS, not me. I don't mind Buffalo and Miami and despise Jets so hope everybody gives them a beating. including bye week

I actually feel bad for the Jets. Nearly 50 straight years of being pre-season SB Champs, and it's finally come to and end this pre-season.

 

[NEPatsfan]

With the realization their reign of terror on the pre-season being over, caused this man to die just a little bit more.

 

[sonnyblack65]

I actually feel bad for the Jets. Nearly 50 straight years of being pre-season SB Champs, and it's finally come to and end this pre-season.

Yeah but they have Joe Namath. Tough all the way around in Div, 40 years for the Phins and Buffalo going to 4 straight SB's with nothing to show. Nah I don't feel bad especially if you go to the Meadowlands and hear their fans

Even Fireman Ed gave up on them/ Anybody else know how to yell out JETS?

 

[NEPatsfan]

Yeah but they have Joe Namath. Tough all the way around in Div, 40 years for the Phins and Buffalo going to 4 straight SB's with nothing to show. Nah I don't feel bad especially if you go to the Meadowlands and hear their fans

I did. Had my special needs daughter, 10 at the time, with me, and a group of them were yelling things like "take the fing hat off you little fing bratt". It was a Pats hat of course.

Certaily can't take on an entire section so I told her to ignore them. When Randy Moss scored near the end of the game right in front of us, she turned and stuck her toungue out at them. Had to let that bit of bad behavior go, figured she earned that one.

Real classy people and stadium.

 

[NEPatsfan]

Speaking of Broadway Joe, last I saw him was, let me think a minute,

 

[sonnyblack65]

Speaking of Broadway Joe, last I saw him was, let me think a minute,

Give me a kiss Suzie 5 sheets to the wind. Maybe if he had his fur coat on and pantyhose

 

[NEPatsfan]

That clip was unitentional comedy Gold.

 

[flyerhawk]

What factual error/s?

Well let's start off with your attempt claim that Barnwell was claiming that the AFC North was the toughest division in the NFL this year. Something he never even implied.

And why are you so desperate to try and make it about whether I think the Ravens are any good or not?

Because you used horrible reasoning to make a clearly biased argument. You started off with a false claim that Barnwell was arguing that injuries were the reason why the Ravens would win the division. Then when that became an untenable argument you shifted to some bizarre argument about the entire piece being terrible because Barnwell said that he wouldn't be surprise that he was wrong. When they became obviously silly you decided that being measured and reasonable and pretending you were the entire time was your best bet.

The guy wrote a piece in part based on the assumption that the Steelers would have more injuries than the Ravens, and also left himself an out regarding his so called position.

No, he said that the inevitable injuries for both teams would benefit the Ravens because they are deeper team.

You act if my take on them is some sort of radical view, when it's pretty much the common view on them.

Your view of the Ravens is perfectly fine. Your dismissal of the Barnwell article is what I took issue with. I don't care about the Ravens or Patriots as they are AFC teams.

Like I said, they are a very solid team and a threat to make the post season, but it will be harder this year for them, for the reasons I already stated.
The two of you are hung up on that one article like it's the end all be all, when in fact it's somewhat loosely written, for the reasons I already stated.

As I just said, I don't care about the Ravens and have no opinion on who will win that division right now. I started this thread challenging the Ravens fans about the season. And then you came in and started claiming that the article was garbage which was simply absurd.

I wouldn't be surprised if they make the post season. Then again I wouldn't be surprised if they don't make the post season. I currently don't see them taking the North, but you know what, with everything being so tight amongst those teams, I wouldn't suprise if they won the North.

Wow? You wouldn't be surprised if they won the North. What a copout.

 

[NEPatsfan]

Well let's start off with your attempt claim that Barnwell was claiming that the AFC North was the toughest division in the NFL this year. Something he never even implied.


Because you used horrible reasoning to make a clearly biased argument. You started off with a false claim that Barnwell was arguing that injuries were the reason why the Ravens would win the division. Then when that became an untenable argument you shifted to some bizarre argument about the entire piece being terrible because Barnwell said that he wouldn't be surprise that he was wrong. When they became obviously silly you decided that being measured and reasonable and pretending you were the entire time was your best bet.



No, he said that the inevitable injuries for both teams would benefit the Ravens because they are deeper team.


Your view of the Ravens is perfectly fine. Your dismissal of the Barnwell article is what I took issue with. I don't care about the Ravens or Patriots as they are AFC teams.


As I just said, I don't care about the Ravens and have no opinion on who will win that division right now. I started this thread challenging the Ravens fans about the season. And then you came in and started claiming that the article was garbage which was simply absurd.



Wow? You wouldn't be surprised if they won the North. What a copout.

The article is garbage. When it comes to football Grantland is garbage. Barnwell sucks, garbage.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Seahawks win their div. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't if they suffer more injuries than their div. foes.

Real hard hitting stuff, book it.

And as for the copout, you mean like how Barnwell left himself a copout? Yet you think his article is a Pulitzer Prize piece.

 

[NEPatsfan]

Happened to put on 98.5 the SportsHub this morning and they are doing a bit on being blocked by people on Twitter. They just covered the one and only Barnwell of Grantland and how he is such a whiny little bitch and blocks people for even innocuous comments.

He's well on his way to a Red Smith Award.

 

[flyerhawk]

The article is garbage. When it comes to football Grantland is garbage. Barnwell sucks, garbage.

Well this is your typical approach. Just double down I guess. Given your utter lack of an ability to offer actual arguments, I can see why you don't like someone like Barnwell. You're probably more of a Dan Shaughnessy kinda guy.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Seahawks win their div. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't if they suffer more injuries than their div. foes.

Real hard hitting stuff, book it.

I guess the other 3000 words don't really matter because he provided a caveat. Really deep critique!

And as for the copout, you mean like how Barnwell left himself a copout? Yet you think his article is a Pulitzer Prize piece.

You clearly don't know what a cop out is. I don't think his article is a Pulitzer Prize winner. I simply find your argument that it is garbage laughable. And given that you conceded that you knew nothing about him at the outset of this discussion, I find it funny that you think your opinion of him holds any water.

Don't worry, he'll probably writer an article explaining why he thinks the Patriots will win their division and you will think it is hard riveting analysis.

 

[flyerhawk]

Happened to put on 98.5 the SportsHub this morning and they are doing a bit on being blocked by people on Twitter. They just covered the one and only Barnwell of Grantland and how he is such a whiny little bitch and blocks people for even innocuous comments.

He's well on his way to a Red Smith Award.

That's DEFINITELY how you should measure the quality of a writer. Whether they block trolls on Twitter. I can see why that would bother someone like you though.

 

[NEPatsfan]

Well this is your typical approach. Just double down I guess. Given your utter lack of an ability to offer actual arguments, I can see why you don't like someone like Barnwell. You're probably more of a Dan Shaughnessy kinda guy.



I guess the other 3000 words don't really matter because he provided a caveat. Really deep critique!



You clearly don't know what a cop out is. I don't think his article is a Pulitzer Prize winner. I simply find your argument that it is garbage laughable. And given that you conceded that you knew nothing about him at the outset of this discussion, I find it funny that you think your opinion of him holds any water.

Don't worry, he'll probably writer an article explaining why he thinks the Patriots will win their division and you will think it is hard riveting analysis.

If he writes one about the Patriots it will probably be a gargabe piece, since he is a crap sports writer, based on his work to date.

He's also a whiney little bitch based on what I have been hearing this morning.

 

[NEPatsfan]

That's DEFINITELY how you should measure the quality of a writer. Whether they block trolls on Twitter. I can see why that would bother someone like you though.

The discussion was about him blocking people for commenting in an innocuous manner, not trolls.

This equals whiney little baby.

But it's OK I'm sure that Red Smith award is right around the corner for him.

 

[flyerhawk]

The discussion was about him blocking people for commenting in an innocuous manner, not trolls.

This equals whiney little baby.

But it's OK I'm sure that Red Smith award is right around the corner for him.

Trolls always think their comments are innocuous. Of course at this point, you've staked your vitally important Internet reputation on smearing Barnwell so obviously there is no other choice but to call him horrible in every possible way. Doesn't matter if you've never read him.

What's Shaughnessy up to this week?

 

[Money]

So what you are saying is that, the "toughest division" in football couldn't beat any good team when it mattered.

Sure...let's entirely ignore that 3 of the 4 teams made the playoffs and just use two games in the playoffs as the barometer for how good the division was. Let's also completely ignore looking at the whole division and simply concentrate on how two higher seeds (NE and Indy) and sole representatives of their respective divisions each won home games against AFCN teams.

 

[NEPatsfan]

Trolls always think their comments are innocuous. Of course at this point, you've staked your vitally important Internet reputation on smearing Barnwell so obviously there is no other choice but to call him horrible in every possible way. Doesn't matter if you've never read him.

What's Shaughnessy up to this week?

Here is somemore hard hitting reporting by Barnwell.

Arizona Has a Numbers Problem «

The 2014 Cardinals were an 11-5 team that outscored their opposition by a mere 11 points. There have been 88 other 11-5 teams since the league went to the 16-game schedule, and 86 of those 88 teams posted a better point differential than these Cardinals. Head coach Bruce Arians is very familiar with one of those two other teams, since he was at the helm for most of its stunning season as the interim head coach of the 2012 Colts. They kept their 11-win stretch up despite a variety of numerical indicators suggesting they would decline. The other example, the 2004 Falcons, dropped off from 11-5 to 8-8 the following year. Different paths!

Notice he makes a statement (Bold) of why it happened yet doesn't give a single example. Wild guess, it doesn't fit the narrative he has already preconstructed for his article, ie he's a hack of a journalist.

Then goes on and makes a proclamation! (Underlined)

The Cards had an avg PD in wins of 8.21 in 11 wins with 4 if those less than7 PD, and an avg PD of 15.17 in 5 losses 1 of which was less than a PD of 7. He somehow doesn't manage to point the stats out.

The primary difference between the two teams he listed is the QB position.

Oh and by the way the PD for the Colts in 2012, which he somehow manages to not mention, because you know the journalism high standards that he holds, -30.

Maybe he should stop trying to apply a baseball predictor (Pythagorean expectation) to football.

Shhhh don't tell the people that give out the Red Smith award.

 

[flyerhawk]

Oh and by the way the PD for the Colts in 2012, which he somehow manages to not mention, because you know the journalism high standards that he holds, -30.

That would maybe be a good point if in fact he didn't reference the 2012 Colts. Except...

The 2014 Cardinals were an 11-5 team that outscored their opposition by a mere 11 points. There have been 88 other 11-5 teams since the league went to the 16-game schedule, and 86 of those 88 teams posted a better point differential than these Cardinals. Head coach Bruce Arians is very familiar with one of those two other teams, since he was at the helm for most of its stunning season as the interim head coach of the 2012 Colts. They kept their 11-win stretch up despite a variety of numerical indicators suggesting they would decline. The other example, the 2004 Falcons, dropped off from 11-5 to 8-8 the following year. Different paths!

The article is about probability. Now for most people, making the argument that teams that play a lot of very close games have a high variance when it comes to their record, is not a particularly bold claim. But apparently for you it is..

Of course if you read the article rather than trying to invent some flaw that doesn't exist you would understand this when he says..

If you read the Buccaneers article on Monday, you will not be surprised to hear that teams that grossly outperform their point differential do not often repeat their feat the following year. Indeed, that fits this group, too. While those 2012 Colts stand out as a defiant exception to the rule, the majority of these teams — 22 of the other 33, excluding the Cardinals — declined the following season. Six maintained their previous record, while just five actually improved the following year. The average team from the group declined by 2.5 wins.

If you read further you would see that teams that defy the Pythagorean expected score by more than 2 wins, had a winning percentage of .780 in games where the differential was 7 points or fewer. The following season those same teams were .457.

This is called using statistics to support your argument. A novel concept for you to be sure.

 

[NEPatsfan]

That would maybe be a good point if in fact he didn't reference the 2012 Colts. Except...


The article is about probability. Now for most people, making the argument that teams that play a lot of very close games have a high variance when it comes to their record, is not a particularly bold claim. But apparently for you it is..

Of course if you read the article rather than trying to invent some flaw that doesn't exist you would understand this when he says..


If you read further you would see that teams that defy the Pythagorean expected score by more than 2 wins, had a winning percentage of .780 in games where the differential was 7 points or fewer. The following season those same teams were .457.

This is called using statistics to support your argument. A novel concept for you to be sure.

I don't think Barnwell is a very good reporter/writer, and it has nothing to do with the Ravens, he sucks period. Fact.

You have the inability to admit wrongness. Fact.

Facts. A novel concept for you to be sure.

 

[flyerhawk]

I don't think Barnwell is a very good reporter/writer, and it has nothing to do with the Ravens, he sucks period. Fact.

You have the inability to admit wrongness. Fact.

Facts. A novel concept for you to be sure.

You've repeatedly made the assertion that he isn't a very good writer. What you haven't done is show WHY. Once again you bring up a factually wrong criticism and now just punt back to saying "He sucks".

The only reason why the Ravens are relevant is because you started off this whole criticism by criticizing the article simply because you didn't like his observations. Now you feel the need to defend your absurd reasoning because no one is ever forced to concede an error on the Internet so if you just keep repeating the same thing and gunning for the last word you feel you can still "win" the argument.

I've been reading Barnwell for some time and he always provides a detailed argument for whatever he is saying unlike most of the crap you read on the Internet today.