| 0 |
Subject: Daily Blurb - December 3, 2013
Posted by: Guru
- [330592710] Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 11:32
Quote of the day
"We took one in the chin today. We got outplayed." -- Saints QB Drew Brees, after a 34-7 beatdown in SeattleDaily blurb
Wow, I am really slacking off on these “daily” blurbs. More like “every now and then” blurbs. It looks like the road to the Super Bowl in the NFC goes through Seattle. They effectively have a three game advantage, since the only two teams that are two games back (N.O. and Carolina) each lost to the Seahawks. And winning on the road in Seattle looks like a daunting proposition. Home field advantage in the AFC is still up for grabs. Denver has the edge if they can win out, but New England would overtake them with a one-game shift in standings, based on the tiebreaker. And Kansas City, Indy, and Cincy are still in play, if Denver and the Pats should falter. The RIFC leagues have completed the regular season. Eight teams from each 14-team league now advance to a three-week single-elimination playoff. For teams that have dominated through the regular season, this is the most maddening part of the season, as history shows that the top seed seldom prevails. I don’t have time to sift through all of the QL results, but for the nine years of the RIFC, the top seed has only won the playoffs once – and that was my team in 2005. The #6 seed has won three times, the #2 and #3 seeds have each won twice, and the #5 seed won once. So while it’s a maddening experience for top seeds, it’s a time of hope for all the others. On any given weekend… In this year’s RIFC, the top seed is Holt, who dominated all season long, averaging almost 170 points per week, more than 25 points better than the weekly average for any other team. Can he buck the trend? He won from the #5 seed slot last year, but… |
| 1 | holt
Donor
ID: 308491916
Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 13:33
|
Top seed has only won once? I could have done without that information! Curious about how QL results now.
|
| 2 | holt
Donor
ID: 308491916
Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 13:35
|
fixing typo:
Curious about QL results now.
Not sure how to even go about digging up the info. Wonder how Bean collected all the info when he made his results spreadsheet.
|
| 3 | The Beezer
Dude
ID: 191202817
Tue, Dec 03, 2013, 19:27
|
Bean dug all his info out of the old threads. He sent me his spreadsheet so I looked through it to see how many top seeds won in the playoffs. Looks like...(drum roll please)....
6 out of 36 leagues - 16.7%
Expected win % if all teams were equal strength - 1 out of 8 - 12.5%
So it does look like being the best team in the regular season does indicate some increased odds of winning - just not much.
Here's the roll call of champions:
2004 - RQL#3 - Athletics Guy
2005 - RIFC - Guru
2008 - AAA#1 - youngroman
2009 - AAA#2 - Frick
2010 - AAA#2 - Judy
2011 - AA - Challenger
Guru's 2005 performance ranks #1 in my book. He went 22-4 in the RIFC, had the most points scored, took the top seed by 4 wins, and then won the playoffs by double digits in all 3 games. Impressive!
|
| 4 | Pacers Rule
Leader
ID: 910311210
Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 03:31
|
Having watched Indy in person last week, I'm not sure Indy has a shot at all for the top seed in the AFC no matter who stumbles. They are definitely not the same team without Reggie Wayne, and their O-line has a few too many holes. Their defense played admirably in a good team win, but even Luck himself has not looked like the same player the last few weeks. What a difference blocking and an elite receiver can make. Indy has finally acknowledged that Richardson is not a starter on their team. He might have been held to 10 yards or less last week. The only time Indy could move the ball on the ground was in the final drive when the Titans were in more of a prevent defense with the game on the line. Give Indy's offensive coordinator credit, that drive was just what the doctor ordered, but after 3 1/2 quarters with no TD's, it was about freaking time. If they didn't have such a reliable kicker, they would have been in real trouble in that game.
|
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: Daily Blurb - December 3, 2013
|
|