Can we please stop using this logic.... (1 Viewer)

[Assani Fisher]

"Team A will probably win this week because they've gotta be upset after being embarrassed like that last week."

"Team A faces a must win this week. I look for them to come out strong."

Nearly every team gives full effort every week in the NFL. Maybe veteran players who have nothing to prove and have starting spots locked up on teams like St Louis and Miami may not give full effort in their coming games, so I could understand if you're saying that. But I see this crappy logic applied all the time, and its just ######ed.

With the "must win" crap, it seems as if people always say that regarding teams that are supposed to be good coming into the year but they never say that regarding teams that weren't supposed to be good. For example if two 0-2 teams meet in week 3 and one was expected to be a SB contender I'll always see tons of "Look for that team to win in week 3 becuase its surely a must win for them now"....as if its not a must win for the other team simply because they weren't expected to be good???!!!!

A team giving full effort in the NFL is nothing special. If you can come up with a good reason why one team would NOT give good effort for a game, then that may be some noteworthy insight. However coming up with a reason that they will give full effort doesn't add anything to any conversation or debate. Its just nonsense that people use to defend their positions when they have no real argument. Stop using it!

Edit: In post #41 I modify my stance a bit.

 

[Dirty Weasel]

This thread is a must-read

 

[The Man with the Plan]

I think it's naive to think that players can play at the same intensity level for every game of the NFL season.

 

[Assani Fisher]

I think it's naive to think that players can play at the same intensity level for every game of the NFL season.

I can give my legitimate full 100% effort in 16 pickup basketball games at the local gym per year. I really don't see why professional athletes on live tv in front of a packed stadium couldn't do the same. Its football- theres only 16 games and you get an entire week to prepare for them. I can't fathom why they wouldn't be able to give their best effort each week unless they are mentally weak.

 

[Tom Servo]

I think it's naive to think that players can play at the same intensity level for every game of the NFL season.

I can give my legitimate full 100% effort in 16 pickup basketball games at the local gym per year. I really don't see why professional athletes on live tv in front of a packed stadium couldn't do the same. Its football- theres only 16 games and you get an entire week to prepare for them. I can't fathom why they wouldn't be able to give their best effort each week unless they are mentally weak.

I understand your logic, but for those 16 pickup games are you training year-round with a professional trainer, making goodwill appearances on behalf of the team and otherwise carrying the duties/obligations of a professional athlete...and in addition to family responsibilities? Probably not.For athletes, there are high and low periods to their workout regimen. Sometimes these low periods occur during the season (even without injury).

 

[Assani Fisher]

I think it's naive to think that players can play at the same intensity level for every game of the NFL season.

I can give my legitimate full 100% effort in 16 pickup basketball games at the local gym per year. I really don't see why professional athletes on live tv in front of a packed stadium couldn't do the same. Its football- theres only 16 games and you get an entire week to prepare for them. I can't fathom why they wouldn't be able to give their best effort each week unless they are mentally weak.

I understand your logic, but for those 16 pickup games are you training year-round with a professional trainer, making goodwill appearances on behalf of the team and otherwise carrying the duties/obligations of a professional athlete...and in addition to family responsibilities? Probably not.For athletes, there are high and low periods to their workout regimen. Sometimes these low periods occur during the season (even without injury).

Yes there are high and low periods of performance. I do not agree that in a 16 game season there are high and low periods of effort for 99% of the athletes in the NFL. Maybe some are good enough to do that, most aren't.Off the top of my head I can think of two examples where I saw this cited:Week 2 when 0-1 New Orleans took on 0-1 Tampa Bay it was deemed by many as a "must win" for New Orleans.This week in the "Stone Cold Lock" thread someone mentioned that Baltimore is going to be very upset over last week and try harder.Do you really think that either of these are good points? Seriously?

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

"Team A will probably win this week because they've gotta be upset after being embarrassed like that last week.""Team A faces a must win this week. I look for them to come out strong."Nearly every team gives full effort every week in the NFL. Maybe veteran players who have nothing to prove and have starting spots locked up on teams like St Louis and Miami may not give full effort in their coming games, so I could understand if you're saying that. But I see this crappy logic applied all the time, and its just ######ed.With the "must win" crap, it seems as if people always say that regarding teams that are supposed to be good coming into the year but they never say that regarding teams that weren't supposed to be good. For example if two 0-2 teams meet in week 3 and one was expected to be a SB contender I'll always see tons of "Look for that team to win in week 3 becuase its surely a must win for them now"....as if its not a must win for the other team simply because they weren't expected to be good???!!!!A team giving full effort in the NFL is nothing special. If you can come up with a good reason why one team would NOT give good effort for a game, then that may be some noteworthy insight. However coming up with a reason that they will give full effort doesn't add anything to any conversation or debate. Its just nonsense that people use to defend their positions when they have no real argument. Stop using it!

Assani Fisher punches faulty logic in the mouth.

 

[coolnerd]

I believe that it is difficult for players to have an equal amount of focus, energy etc for 16 games. This does not mean the player is not trying, working hard etc, but does mean he is not at his best performance level. This is why the undefeated season is so difficult because even superior teams have a couple of games where they just don't play well.

 

[ninerfanatic492000]

can everyone here say that everyday they give maximum effort at work? b/c football is there job. where most of us don't have physical stress/fatigue we have days where we just go thru the motion regardless. now imagine those days at work where your just going thru the motions and then a MLB annihilates you.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

If you don't believe that players that play 16 regular season games, along with 4-5 preseason games and (hopefully) postseason games don't ratchet it up for certain games, you're just being naive.

The season is an emotional rollercoaster, and an NFC East team playing a divisional foe is much more important than playing an AFC team like the Jets. The wins don't count the same - look at the tiebreaker procedures.

Divisional games >> Conference games >>>> AFC Games.

So while you may have enjoyed Cowboys / Patriots, the Pats simply would care more about the Colts because that game means more.

As for "must win games", if a team is on the verge of going significantly down in the playoff chances (like being 0-3 in the conference and facing a non-divisional conference game), they will be more "up" and in a "must win" situation. That doesn't mean that the other team won't play hard - but it does mean the outcome means more to the team in the "must win" situation.

As for what teams would do differently, a player might play hurt if the game means more. Look at Marvin Harrison - if it was a playoff game, he would have played against New England. That game means more than when it gets played in the regular season.

The logic also works in reverse - hence the phrase "trap game" or "looking towards next week". That happens a few times a year, especially with younger teams and/or with inexperienced coaching.

 

[Burning Sensation]

If you don't believe that players that play 16 regular season games, along with 4-5 preseason games and (hopefully) postseason games don't ratchet it up for certain games, you're just being naive.The season is an emotional rollercoaster, and an NFC East team playing a divisional foe is much more important than playing an AFC team like the Jets. The wins don't count the same - look at the tiebreaker procedures.Divisional games >> Conference games >>>> AFC Games.So while you may have enjoyed Cowboys / Patriots, the Pats simply would care more about the Colts because that game means more. As for "must win games", if a team is on the verge of going significantly down in the playoff chances (like being 0-3 in the conference and facing a non-divisional conference game), they will be more "up" and in a "must win" situation. That doesn't mean that the other team won't play hard - but it does mean the outcome means more to the team in the "must win" situation.As for what teams would do differently, a player might play hurt if the game means more. Look at Marvin Harrison - if it was a playoff game, he would have played against New England. That game means more than when it gets played in the regular season.The logic also works in reverse - hence the phrase "trap game" or "looking towards next week". That happens a few times a year, especially with younger teams and/or with inexperienced coaching.

My favorite part of Assanis post is how he compares the rigors of the NFL to his weekly pickup basketball game.

 

[Doug Drinen]

I'm with Assani. Most often, we explain things after the fact in terms of focus or motivation or whatever.

No matter what happens to the Ravens this week or the rest of the year, we will be able to "explain" it by citing the Steeler game. If they bounce back strong, it will be because the Steeler game made them re-focus and gave them motivation. If they lose 5 of their next 7, it will be because the Steeler game made them realize that they can't compete with the big boys in the AFC this year, so there is no sense giving full effort anymore.

And another thing: who says being in a "must win" situation is more likely than not to produce positive results? Team A is in a must-win situation and wins. Obviously it was because they had motivation. Team B is in a must-win situation and loses. Obviously it was because they were pressing and didn't deal well with the stress.

I think this link is relevant to the discussion.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

If you don't believe that players that play 16 regular season games, along with 4-5 preseason games and (hopefully) postseason games don't ratchet it up for certain games, you're just being naive.The season is an emotional rollercoaster, and an NFC East team playing a divisional foe is much more important than playing an AFC team like the Jets. The wins don't count the same - look at the tiebreaker procedures.Divisional games >> Conference games >>>> AFC Games.So while you may have enjoyed Cowboys / Patriots, the Pats simply would care more about the Colts because that game means more. As for "must win games", if a team is on the verge of going significantly down in the playoff chances (like being 0-3 in the conference and facing a non-divisional conference game), they will be more "up" and in a "must win" situation. That doesn't mean that the other team won't play hard - but it does mean the outcome means more to the team in the "must win" situation.As for what teams would do differently, a player might play hurt if the game means more. Look at Marvin Harrison - if it was a playoff game, he would have played against New England. That game means more than when it gets played in the regular season.The logic also works in reverse - hence the phrase "trap game" or "looking towards next week". That happens a few times a year, especially with younger teams and/or with inexperienced coaching.

My favorite part of Assanis post is how he compares the rigors of the NFL to his weekly pickup basketball game.

Especially considering he totally dogged it at least three times. "I'm kinda tired guys." Whatever. YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME.

 

[az_prof]

I think there is a lot of validity to the original post in this thread and I would love to see some statistics of the actual results of those games where a team "must win" or "is coming off an embarassing loss"; my suspicion is that the facts don't support the theory that this type of motivation makes a difference.

I also agree that it is ridiculous to think that in a 16 game season players would not be pumped up for every game. The claim that they have a lot of appearances and practice and family obligations is laughable. I regularly work until midnight or get up at 6 in the morning to write lectures or grade essays; I do what I have to do. And I am not playing football, which would be much more fun than what I do and they only work half the year.

If there is a difference from week to week I suspect it might be in the coaching. I have to believe that players are always playing to win and putting it on the line; but I can imagine that week to week a coach may not always stay up into the wee hours developing a game plan or studying film. But still, the competition is so high that it is hard to believe that people let down that much during the season.

So why do bad teams beat good teams? Because the difference in talent level is less than we like to believe. These players are all professionals or they wouldn't be in the NFL and FA and the draft ensure that there is a pretty good dispersal of talent. I think coaching has more to do with the ups and downs and the upsets than whether a team "has to win" or "was embarassed" the week before.

 

[benm3218]

Do you think that T.O. was motivated last week against the Eagles? Do you think that it motivates VY more when he goes back to Houston?

YES and YES

 

[Enforcer]

I'm with Assani.

I can just feel Assani beaming with pride after reading that line. How many people would give their left nut to know that Drinen sides with them in a debate?Congrats, Assani. This Bud's for you.

 

[mrspree15]

This use of logic really put Assani's back against the wall, look for him to make a strong post about it.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I think it's naive to think that players can play at the same intensity level for every game of the NFL season.

I can give my legitimate full 100% effort in 16 pickup basketball games at the local gym per year. I really don't see why professional athletes on live tv in front of a packed stadium couldn't do the same. Its football- theres only 16 games and you get an entire week to prepare for them. I can't fathom why they wouldn't be able to give their best effort each week unless they are mentally weak.

While I agree with your overall point in your initial post, I don't think your 16 pickup games are analogous.NFL players will be at full intensity for every game at game time.

The question is whether they can be at full intensity for every practice during the week. I think the answer is no -- not every week. Some weeks of practice are more focused and intense than others, in part based on how big the players perceive the game to be.

 

[Stompin' Tom Connors]

In a league with relative parity in terms of individual player talent levels, and where the maxim "any given Sunday" still rings true to a large degree, I fully believe that "the team who wants it more" is a legitimate factor in close fought games over the course of the full 60 minutes of play.

The emotional aspect of the NFL and its effect on player absolutely figures into the game. It's why there is such thing as home field advantage.

 

[SSOG]

I think it's naive to think that players can play at the same intensity level for every game of the NFL season.

I can give my legitimate full 100% effort in 16 pickup basketball games at the local gym per year. I really don't see why professional athletes on live tv in front of a packed stadium couldn't do the same. Its football- theres only 16 games and you get an entire week to prepare for them. I can't fathom why they wouldn't be able to give their best effort each week unless they are mentally weak.

Do you give exactly the same level of effort during every single day of your work? I know *I* certainly don't. Some days I work harder because I'm in a better mood, some days I work harder because I'm more motivated. Some days I work harder because I'm fresher, such as after time off. Some days I work harder because I fear for my job security. Why can't the same be true of NFL players?If you're convinced that all NFL players give their full effort every week, go look at Miami's game-by-game defensive statistics from 2004. Personally, it was readily apparent to me (as well as everyone who was watching the team with me that season) that as the year went on, the defense become more and more disheartened by the PUTRID showing by the offense. Over the first 4 weeks, the defense came out firing, on a mission, hellbent to destroy the opposition... and over the course of the season, they came back each week with less and less fire because they realized, in the long run, it wouldn't make any defense, because their offense would just cost them games again. Of course, they did manage to "get up" for the Patriots game... but that doesn't really help your cause, either.I agree that "full effort" and "getting up for games" is drastically overrated, but I disagree that it doesn't exist. Even coaches will often admit that a player can't play with the same level of intensity every single week.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

Do you think that T.O. was motivated last week against the Eagles? Do you think that it motivates VY more when he goes back to Houston? YES and YES

TO's game in 2006, week 5 in Philly -- 3 catches for 45 yards with several drops. Was he motivated then?

 

[Burning Sensation]

I dont no for sure if an embarrasing loss or must win gives a team an emotional advantage, because i can see that working both ways. Dont kid yourself however, certain emotions can cause a player to be worse or better in any given game/season.

Forgot who the Packers played on Monday night, but Favre threw like 23 TD's after his father died, do you think he and his teammates were up for that game a bit more than normal? How about the Saints over the Falcons last year in the Saints first home game since Katrina. I personally bet that based on the fact i thought the Saints would be riding high on emotion.

Now being able to tell how certain emotions will affect certain outcomes might be tough, but they certainly play a part, and to think otherwise is just wrong.

 

[Sonny Lubick Blowup Doll]

My favorite part of Assanis post is how he compares the rigors of the NFL to his weekly pickup basketball game.

 

[bonesman]

I dont no for sure if an embarrasing loss or must win gives a team an emotional advantage, because i can see that working both ways. Dont kid yourself however, certain emotions can cause a player to be worse or better in any given game/season. Forgot who the Packers played on Monday night, but Favre threw like 23 TD's after his father died, do you think he and his teammates were up for that game a bit more than normal? How about the Saints over the Falcons last year in the Saints first home game since Katrina. I personally bet that based on the fact i thought the Saints would be riding high on emotion.Now being able to tell how certain emotions will affect certain outcomes might be tough, but they certainly play a part, and to think otherwise is just wrong.

it was against Oakland His receivers really came out to play that day. Favre made some incredible passes but I accredit much of how well he did to his receivers' will and determination to ensure that Brett had a good game.

 

[Frawfog]

I'm with Assani. Most often, we explain things after the fact in terms of focus or motivation or whatever.

No matter what happens to the Ravens this week or the rest of the year, we will be able to "explain" it by citing the Steeler game. If they bounce back strong, it will be because the Steeler game made them re-focus and gave them motivation. If they lose 5 of their next 7, it will be because the Steeler game made them realize that they can't compete with the big boys in the AFC this year, so there is no sense giving full effort anymore.

And another thing: who says being in a "must win" situation is more likely than not to produce positive results? Team A is in a must-win situation and wins. Obviously it was because they had motivation. Team B is in a must-win situation and loses. Obviously it was because they were pressing and didn't deal well with the stress.

I think this link is relevant to the discussion.

I agree. For example its an amazing coincidence that after all these years the Browns finally found to motivation to win when they assemble a stud offensive line and get a good QB.

 

[Captain Hook]

Some really good points on several facets of Assani's post - BUT the reality is that if Anyone could isolate any one of those aspects of prepration/practice/game readiness/effort at gametime vs actual results, they could live like a king on the money they could make in Vegas on the few games per year where they could apply that knowledge..... just not possible on a consistent basis even though in any given week we try and make an argument about one of those reasons why Team A will win or lose a specific game.

 

[MCguidance]

I think it's naive to think that players can play at the same intensity level for every game of the NFL season.

I can give my legitimate full 100% effort in 16 pickup basketball games at the local gym per year. I really don't see why professional athletes on live tv in front of a packed stadium couldn't do the same. Its football- theres only 16 games and you get an entire week to prepare for them. I can't fathom why they wouldn't be able to give their best effort each week unless they are mentally weak.

So youre saying that you dive for every loose ball in the same manner in the first game of the year or the 16th in order to make the playoffs? I think it's normal human behavior to act on adrenaline and comprehend how some moments are more important than others. Playing a playoff clinching game, homefield advantage game, and a game against your rival are a few examples where I could see this happening.

 

[Mark Wimer]

I think it's naive to think that players can play at the same intensity level for every game of the NFL season.

I can give my legitimate full 100% effort in 16 pickup basketball games at the local gym per year. I really don't see why professional athletes on live tv in front of a packed stadium couldn't do the same. Its football- theres only 16 games and you get an entire week to prepare for them. I can't fathom why they wouldn't be able to give their best effort each week unless they are mentally weak.

While I agree with your overall point in your initial post, I don't think your 16 pickup games are analogous.NFL players will be at full intensity for every game at game time.

The question is whether they can be at full intensity for every practice during the week. I think the answer is no -- not every week. Some weeks of practice are more focused and intense than others, in part based on how big the players perceive the game to be.

I'm with Maurile on the point about the relative perceived importance of the upcoming game affecting effort in the week preceding a matchup (I'll give my response to Doug's point on the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy in a moment). Reducing the NFL season to a mere 16 game days as the OP does in subsequent posts understates the amount of training and preparation modern professional athletes undergo in the course of a year to remain in peak physical condition/at the top of their talents/abilities. When I started participating in fantasy football, guys like Stan Humphries could come into training camp out of shape and flabby, work their way into condition, and perhaps even lead a team into the Super Bowl (1994 Bobby Ross team in San Diego in Humphries' instance). That isn't the case anymore. Today's top-tier football players (and most of the rest of the league, too) engage in year-round strength training/rehab on the past season's injuries/game tape study. It is their job, their passion, their life, essentially. Mini-camps start shortly after the April draft. Training camp commences in July and practices run through the end of the season in Early January (27 or more weeks of practices in a row). It is not possible to keep oneself "up" for that long of a period of time. There are going to be weeks when a nagging injury is more painful and difficult to manage, or a new bone bruise is suffered when getting kicked in the leg by a lineman, or whatever... bottom line, NO player can be at the top peak of his performance for every practice, every week of the season. It's just not human nature. So, I agree with Maurile that the perceived importance of an upcoming game (whether it's a division rivalry or as Jeff P. points out, a inter-divisional game, would inevitably receive different weights in BOTH teams' minds) will tend to increase or decrease focus during any given weeks' preparation/practices.

Speaking to Doug's point (and the OP's point) about the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, I think that it is not a given that a prior event can help motivate or demoralize a team, but I do think that it is an intangible factor that does have a weight depending on how the teams' coaching staff handles the aftermath of an embarrassing loss or losing streak (as other posters have correctly identified above, in my opinion). Good coaching staffs can maintain a team's focus through the toughest situations and turn a losing streak into a positive (New Orleans this year leaps to mind), while other teams seem to fold in the face of adversity (it surprises me how bad Chicago is this year, for example - I thought better of that staff, but they have had a ton of injuries to key players). I do think that it is not automatically a logical fallacy to say an embarrassing loss may or should motivate a team in the coming week (or that an upcoming key game will cause the intensity level to rise to a peak), but I do think that it is a logical fallacy to claim that such factors will definitely cause such a response.

My nickel's worth.

 

[Assani Fisher]

can everyone here say that everyday they give maximum effort at work? b/c football is there job. where most of us don't have physical stress/fatigue we have days where we just go thru the motion regardless. now imagine those days at work where your just going thru the motions and then a MLB annihilates you.

This is a bad analogy imo. A better analogy would be that your job consists of 16 main "presentations" or "performanaces" every year and that the rest of your 349 days of the year are spent preparing for those. Would you give full effort every single day? Of course not. But is it reasonable to expectd that you'd be giving full effort on those 16 days? Yeah I think so.

 

[Assani Fisher]

If you don't believe that players that play 16 regular season games, along with 4-5 preseason games and (hopefully) postseason games don't ratchet it up for certain games, you're just being naive.The season is an emotional rollercoaster, and an NFC East team playing a divisional foe is much more important than playing an AFC team like the Jets. The wins don't count the same - look at the tiebreaker procedures.Divisional games >> Conference games >>>> AFC Games.So while you may have enjoyed Cowboys / Patriots, the Pats simply would care more about the Colts because that game means more. As for "must win games", if a team is on the verge of going significantly down in the playoff chances (like being 0-3 in the conference and facing a non-divisional conference game), they will be more "up" and in a "must win" situation. That doesn't mean that the other team won't play hard - but it does mean the outcome means more to the team in the "must win" situation.As for what teams would do differently, a player might play hurt if the game means more. Look at Marvin Harrison - if it was a playoff game, he would have played against New England. That game means more than when it gets played in the regular season.The logic also works in reverse - hence the phrase "trap game" or "looking towards next week". That happens a few times a year, especially with younger teams and/or with inexperienced coaching.

Disagreed. I think that these "trap games" are a myth too. When theres a "trap game" scenario we always remember the times in which the better team gets upset by the underdog, so that re-enforces our beliefs in the myth. However thats selective memory. We forget about the times in which the favorite wins as expected. What about Indy(Carolina) and NE(Washington) the week before their big matchup...those were surely trap games, no?Its easy how our memories can remember only the games that back up our flawed beliefs. I'd be interested in seeing an actual analysis of games played before and after big rivalry games....did the team win as much as expected? I'd bet so.

 

[Assani Fisher]

If you don't believe that players that play 16 regular season games, along with 4-5 preseason games and (hopefully) postseason games don't ratchet it up for certain games, you're just being naive.The season is an emotional rollercoaster, and an NFC East team playing a divisional foe is much more important than playing an AFC team like the Jets. The wins don't count the same - look at the tiebreaker procedures.Divisional games >> Conference games >>>> AFC Games.So while you may have enjoyed Cowboys / Patriots, the Pats simply would care more about the Colts because that game means more. As for "must win games", if a team is on the verge of going significantly down in the playoff chances (like being 0-3 in the conference and facing a non-divisional conference game), they will be more "up" and in a "must win" situation. That doesn't mean that the other team won't play hard - but it does mean the outcome means more to the team in the "must win" situation.As for what teams would do differently, a player might play hurt if the game means more. Look at Marvin Harrison - if it was a playoff game, he would have played against New England. That game means more than when it gets played in the regular season.The logic also works in reverse - hence the phrase "trap game" or "looking towards next week". That happens a few times a year, especially with younger teams and/or with inexperienced coaching.

My favorite part of Assanis post is how he compares the rigors of the NFL to his weekly pickup basketball game.

I don't see what "rigors" have to do with it? I'm not arguing that my games are easier to play. Rather, I'm arguing that theres obviously more hype and incentive for the pro athletes to play their hardest since they're on live tv and are getting evaluated and paid for it....and if I can give max effort 16 times per year, then surely they can, no? How rigorous it is has nothing to do with it. I'm simply talking about effort level.

 

[coolnerd]

can everyone here say that everyday they give maximum effort at work? b/c football is there job. where most of us don't have physical stress/fatigue we have days where we just go thru the motion regardless. now imagine those days at work where your just going thru the motions and then a MLB annihilates you.

This is a bad analogy imo. A better analogy would be that your job consists of 16 main "presentations" or "performanaces" every year and that the rest of your 349 days of the year are spent preparing for those. Would you give full effort every single day? Of course not. But is it reasonable to expectd that you'd be giving full effort on those 16 days? Yeah I think so.

While it maybe be a person's desire to be at his or her best for those 16 presentation, health (all aspects), outside circumstances, and being an imperfect human will prevent the person from being equally prepared and motivated for each presentation. If a person even comes reasonably close to being able to do so (say 13/14 times), he or she is probably at the top of his profession.

 

[Spartans Rule]

Do you give exactly the same level of effort during every single day of your work? I know *I* certainly don't. Some days I work harder because I'm in a better mood, some days I work harder because I'm more motivated. Some days I work harder because I'm fresher, such as after time off. Some days I work harder because I fear for my job security. Why can't the same be true of NFL players?

I'm sure it is true of NFL players, but it seems like a stretch to pick one causal factor and apply it as a blanket statement to an entire team.Your average NFL team probably has guys going in every direction on this scale every week. There's some guys who are fired up and some who are down, some for football reasons and some for personal reasons. Trying to guess a team's performance level based on motivational factors is an exercise in futility IMO.

 

[yellowdog]

My favorite part of Assanis post is how he compares the rigors of the NFL to his weekly pickup basketball game.

The rigors of carrying large pots of steaming hot oatmeal, without spilling any, for days on end trumps both of those.

 

[Assani Fisher]

Do you think that T.O. was motivated last week against the Eagles? Do you think that it motivates VY more when he goes back to Houston?

YES and YES

I'm glad you mentioned this because this gives me some actual data to look at. Lets look at how T.O. has done playing against Philly since he left:

2006 week 5: 3 catches, 45 yards, 0 TDs

2006 week 16: 2 catches, 23 yards, 1 TDs

2007 week 9: 10 catches, 174 yards, 1 TDs

Totals against Philly: 3 games, 15 catches, 242 yards, 2 TDs

Average per game against the Eagles: 5 catches, 80.66 yards, .66 TDs

Now lets look at T.O.'s other games while playing for Dallas....

His total stats for each year

2006: 16 games, 85 catches, 1180 yards, 13 TDs

2007: 8 games, 44 catches, 730 yards, 6 TDs

Totals: 24 games, 129 catches, 1910 yards, 19 TDs

Now lets take out those 3 games against Philly and we get....

Totals in non-Philly games: 21 games, 114 catches, 1668 yards, 17 TDs

Average per game in games NOT against the Eagles: 5.42 catches, 79.42 yards, .81 TDs

So, in completely shocking news(sarcasm), Terrell Owens plays just about the same against Philly as he does against other teams.

Complete recap of this series of posts

 

[Assani Fisher]

I dont no for sure if an embarrasing loss or must win gives a team an emotional advantage, because i can see that working both ways. Dont kid yourself however, certain emotions can cause a player to be worse or better in any given game/season. Forgot who the Packers played on Monday night, but Favre threw like 23 TD's after his father died, do you think he and his teammates were up for that game a bit more than normal? How about the Saints over the Falcons last year in the Saints first home game since Katrina. I personally bet that based on the fact i thought the Saints would be riding high on emotion.Now being able to tell how certain emotions will affect certain outcomes might be tough, but they certainly play a part, and to think otherwise is just wrong.

Remember how I talked about selective memory?Yeah, this would be a great example.As Doug said, if Favre would've thrown up a stinker we would've said "Oh surely he was impacted negatively by his father's death." When the truth is that it simply didn't matter and was a random occurance. For some reason, we love to look back and assign reasoning to why things happened always. Its easy to do in hindsight, but when you actually track the stats and try to do it before the games you'll see how ridiculous it is.

 

[Assani Fisher]

I dont no for sure if an embarrasing loss or must win gives a team an emotional advantage, because i can see that working both ways. Dont kid yourself however, certain emotions can cause a player to be worse or better in any given game/season. Forgot who the Packers played on Monday night, but Favre threw like 23 TD's after his father died, do you think he and his teammates were up for that game a bit more than normal? How about the Saints over the Falcons last year in the Saints first home game since Katrina. I personally bet that based on the fact i thought the Saints would be riding high on emotion.Now being able to tell how certain emotions will affect certain outcomes might be tough, but they certainly play a part, and to think otherwise is just wrong.

it was against Oakland His receivers really came out to play that day. Favre made some incredible passes but I accredit much of how well he did to his receivers' will and determination to ensure that Brett had a good game.

LOL....so if his father hadn't died they wouldn't have given max effort when those balls were in the air? But because his father died it enabled them to make some crazy circus catches? I'm shocked that so many seemingly rational people can honestly dismiss variance and random luck so much in their analysis.

 

[Assani Fisher]

can everyone here say that everyday they give maximum effort at work? b/c football is there job. where most of us don't have physical stress/fatigue we have days where we just go thru the motion regardless. now imagine those days at work where your just going thru the motions and then a MLB annihilates you.

This is a bad analogy imo. A better analogy would be that your job consists of 16 main "presentations" or "performanaces" every year and that the rest of your 349 days of the year are spent preparing for those. Would you give full effort every single day? Of course not. But is it reasonable to expectd that you'd be giving full effort on those 16 days? Yeah I think so.

While it maybe be a person's desire to be at his or her best for those 16 presentation, health (all aspects), outside circumstances, and being an imperfect human will prevent the person from being equally prepared and motivated for each presentation. If a person even comes reasonably close to being able to do so (say 13/14 times), he or she is probably at the top of his profession.

Oh agreed completely. I never argued that every player would always be able to play their best. I just argued that they are able to give maximum effort for 16 games per year.

 

[Pygmy Marmoset]

can everyone here say that everyday they give maximum effort at work? b/c football is there job. where most of us don't have physical stress/fatigue we have days where we just go thru the motion regardless. now imagine those days at work where your just going thru the motions and then a MLB annihilates you.

This is a bad analogy imo. A better analogy would be that your job consists of 16 main "presentations" or "performanaces" every year and that the rest of your 349 days of the year are spent preparing for those. Would you give full effort every single day? Of course not. But is it reasonable to expectd that you'd be giving full effort on those 16 days? Yeah I think so.

While it maybe be a person's desire to be at his or her best for those 16 presentation, health (all aspects), outside circumstances, and being an imperfect human will prevent the person from being equally prepared and motivated for each presentation. If a person even comes reasonably close to being able to do so (say 13/14 times), he or she is probably at the top of his profession.

Oh agreed completely. I never argued that every player would always be able to play their best. I just argued that they are able to give maximum effort for 16 games per year.

Then we should definitely take coaches' ability to motivate players completely out of the way we discuss coaching. Obviously the players are already giving maximum effort, so coaches shouldn't be able to make a difference in that regard.

 

[Tanner9919]

"Team A will probably win this week because they've gotta be upset after being embarrassed like that last week.""Team A faces a must win this week. I look for them to come out strong."Nearly every team gives full effort every week in the NFL. Maybe veteran players who have nothing to prove and have starting spots locked up on teams like St Louis and Miami may not give full effort in their coming games, so I could understand if you're saying that. But I see this crappy logic applied all the time, and its just ######ed.With the "must win" crap, it seems as if people always say that regarding teams that are supposed to be good coming into the year but they never say that regarding teams that weren't supposed to be good. For example if two 0-2 teams meet in week 3 and one was expected to be a SB contender I'll always see tons of "Look for that team to win in week 3 becuase its surely a must win for them now"....as if its not a must win for the other team simply because they weren't expected to be good???!!!!A team giving full effort in the NFL is nothing special. If you can come up with a good reason why one team would NOT give good effort for a game, then that may be some noteworthy insight. However coming up with a reason that they will give full effort doesn't add anything to any conversation or debate. Its just nonsense that people use to defend their positions when they have no real argument. Stop using it!

this has nothing on the `Athletes for Christ' BS..

 

[Assani Fisher]

Alright, let me modify my original statement a bit:#1: I believe that 99% of NFL players give full 100% effort for all 16 games#2: Yes, you guys are right that not all players will give 100% effort for every day of practice. Therefore some players may be slightly more prepared for one game than another. However I believe that this difference in performance is extremely small.#3: Its ridiculous to think that you can even know one player's motivations, yet alone an entire team's! Moreover, what may motivate one player on a team to play harder next week may actually hinder another player.#4: I still maintain that we use this logic to defend our picks. I think its funny how we will only look at one team's motivation while ignoring the other's. Take a look at this statement made just today:

Colts pissed about the performance in SD = extra motivation IMO

I simply don't understand this line of thought. Both Indy and KC(their opponent this week) lost this past week. So why will Indy have extra motivation but KC will not? We always act as if only good teams can get pissed off and extra motivated while the bad teams never do....thats ridiculous. BTW...sorry Kevin, didn't mean to pick on you in particular, just happened to be reading your post right before I posted here.Oh and also....what reminded me to post this thread last week was the comment that the Ravens were gonna play extra hard against Cincy due to being embarrassed the week before. How did that turn out? Of course, whomever made that comment will conveniently forget about this time yet remember the times when it does hold true thus "proving" his theory.

 

[Assani Fisher]

Oh and just to add....

I also think the whole "let down game" or "overlooking an opponent" thing is complete crap as well.

Theres just no way that you can know an entire team's mindset before a game(yet alone both team's mindsets!!)....we always look back like Doug said and assign these silly reasons to why a team won, but if we did it beforehand and actually tracked the results I'd bet that we'd see how foolish they all really are.

 

[Pygmy Marmoset]

Oh and just to add....I also think the whole "let down game" or "overlooking an opponent" thing is complete crap as well.

Then you're out of your mind. You've completely taken the emotional element out of football when making your analysis in this thread, and that doesn't make any sense. It makes sense in poker, but it's ridiculous in sports.

 

[Assani Fisher]

Oh and just to add....I also think the whole "let down game" or "overlooking an opponent" thing is complete crap as well.

Then you're out of your mind. You've completely taken the emotional element out of football when making your analysis in this thread, and that doesn't make any sense. It makes sense in poker, but it's ridiculous in sports.

So you're saying that you can predict the mindset of 100+ players(2 entire teams) before a game? Please explain to me how you can do this.

 

[Pygmy Marmoset]

Oh and just to add....

I also think the whole "let down game" or "overlooking an opponent" thing is complete crap as well.

Then you're out of your mind. You've completely taken the emotional element out of football when making your analysis in this thread, and that doesn't make any sense. It makes sense in poker, but it's ridiculous in sports.

So you're saying that you can predict the mindset of 100+ players(2 entire teams) before a game? Please explain to me how you can do this.

I'm saying it's just as predictable as anything else in sports gambling. It's a reasonable basis for forming a theory about the game. It's not "complete crap" is what I'm saying. You are the one speaking in absolutes here.

 

[Assani Fisher]

Oh and just to add....

I also think the whole "let down game" or "overlooking an opponent" thing is complete crap as well.

Then you're out of your mind. You've completely taken the emotional element out of football when making your analysis in this thread, and that doesn't make any sense. It makes sense in poker, but it's ridiculous in sports.

So you're saying that you can predict the mindset of 100+ players(2 entire teams) before a game? Please explain to me how you can do this.

I'm saying it's just as predictable as anything else in sports gambling. It's a reasonable basis for forming a theory about the game. It's not "complete crap" is what I'm saying. You are the one speaking in absolutes here.

Disagreed. Detailed analysis of systems, trends, and players can provide people with good insight into future happenings in sports....in fact thats pretty much what this site is all about, no? I do not think it is a reasonable basis for forming a theory about the game. It is simply foolish to think that you can even know one player's thought process or motivation. Its extremely foolish to think that you can guess an entire team's. And almost always(as with the Indy/KC example I showed above) you're completely ignoring the other team.

I didn't even bring up sports betting, but silly logic like this is why there are so many long term losers in sports betting.

Yes I am speaking in absolutes...I'm not saying that a team is never extra motivated or extra let down; I'm saying its impossible to know that ahead of time.

 

[Jersey35]

Interesting topic, and I agree with most of Assani's assertions, but possibly for slightly different reasons. I've read the whole thread, and didn't really see the points I'm going to make made, so I apologize if I'm repeating what has already been said:

Individuals are each motivated and discouraged by different things. When down, some people will rise to the occassion, others will become discouraged. Some people relish the role of the underdog, while others are most comfortable basking in the confidence of the favorite. The point is that a team is not itself an individual, motivated by one set of circumstances, a team is a collection of individuals that are each affected in different ways by the world around them.

I agree with others that it is likely impossible for every player to give 100% every minute of every game, but I think that the overall effort across the board is likely to be relatively equal in most cases. I think that individuals ARE motivated by things such as must win games, or my father passed away last night, and other such things. But at the same time, others are being motivated or discouraged by their own situations, making predictions impossible to make.

There are so many motivating or discouraging factors swirling around each team every week, with each player being affected differently by the same circumstances - not to mention each player facing their own unique and personal life issues, it should be impossible for anyone to predict a victory based on a single (possibly imaginary or subjective) "motivational" situation, such as a "MUST WIN GAME". One is better suited to predicting games and performance based on the actual talent level of the teams & coaching staffs, injuries, and home/away status.

It is precisely the unpredictable and subjective nature of motivation that makes predictions by an outsider/fan based on situational circumstances at a team level useless.

 

[831hoops]

Alright, let me modify my original statement a bit:#1: I believe that 99% of NFL players give full 100% effort for all 16 games#2: Yes, you guys are right that not all players will give 100% effort for every day of practice. Therefore some players may be slightly more prepared for one game than another. However I believe that this difference in performance is extremely small.#3: Its ridiculous to think that you can even know one player's motivations, yet alone an entire team's! Moreover, what may motivate one player on a team to play harder next week may actually hinder another player.#4: I still maintain that we use this logic to defend our picks. I think its funny how we will only look at one team's motivation while ignoring the other's. Take a look at this statement made just today:

Colts pissed about the performance in SD = extra motivation IMO

I simply don't understand this line of thought. Both Indy and KC(their opponent this week) lost this past week. So why will Indy have extra motivation but KC will not? We always act as if only good teams can get pissed off and extra motivated while the bad teams never do....thats ridiculous. BTW...sorry Kevin, didn't mean to pick on you in particular, just happened to be reading your post right before I posted here.Oh and also....what reminded me to post this thread last week was the comment that the Ravens were gonna play extra hard against Cincy due to being embarrassed the week before. How did that turn out? Of course, whomever made that comment will conveniently forget about this time yet remember the times when it does hold true thus "proving" his theory.

As a coach, I don't think you are giving #2 nearly enough weight. The will to win is nothing without the will to prepare to win.

 

[Pygmy Marmoset]

Disagreed. Detailed analysis of systems, trends, and players can provide people with good insight into future happenings in sports....

Sure can. And you can see by some of those trends what tends to motivate certain teams, players, and coaches, if you're willing to factor that in.When was the last time the Colts lost 3 in a row?When was the last time the Patriots lost 3 in a row?When was the last time the Patriots lost 2 to the same team in the same season?Patterns emerge, and trends show themselves by answering questions like this. As for "well, that's just after-the-fact justification" - the same can be said for all of the analysis done on this board. Sometimes it's the deciding factor, sometimes it's not. But saying that there's no more energy or push for some games than there is for others in players' minds is, to me, like saying there's no such thing as home-field advantage. No, it doesn't always work out and it's not always the deciding factor in a game. That doesn't make it any less existent.

 

[Pygmy Marmoset]

#1: I believe that 99% of NFL players give full 100% effort for all 16 games

Really? So at any given game, there is only 1 guy total who's not giving all-out 100% effort the whole game?