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

[renesauz]

While I do think that the motivational factors are often overstated, to say they don't exist is ludicrous....Only somebody who has never played organised sports would make such a statement.

As someone who's played organised sports his whole life, I find myself in shock that someone would fail to believe or understand the importance of motivation, or the subtle changes that infect AN ENTIRE TEAM (not just one or two individuals). Emotions are contangious...that's why you always here about LEADERS on teams, and why they are so important.

 

[Paddy O'Seanessy]

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 response is not topical. The argument is that there is no teamwide elavation of performance. To point out individual decrease in performance cases has nothing to do with the premise.

 

[FantasyTrader]

I've heard players (and entire offensive/defensive units) talk about what you're saying does not exist. Statements like "Our backs are against the wall" and "The playoffs started for us in week 14". When I hear them make these statements I feel that they're being sincere. It might not even be a conscious decision that they make, I think you can still go about your business at what you THOUGHT was 100% but when faced with "we either win or the Golf season starts early" you might find an extra level of focus and determination that eclipses what you previosuly thought was 100% effort. Bah - I'm explaining this like dog crap. The logical mistake you are making is by jumping to the conclusion that if Indy should have been caught "looking ahead", but ended up winning the game...then they weren't looking ahead. Whether they won or lost doesn't prove or disprove the teams mindset.

 

[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 response is not topical. The argument is that there is no teamwide elavation of performance. To point out individual decrease in performance cases has nothing to do with the premise.

Actually, there are multiple arguments, including post #41's suggestion that 99% of NFL players play a full 100% every game. This post is perfectly topical.

 

[Assani Fisher]

While I do think that the motivational factors are often overstated, to say they don't exist is ludicrous....Only somebody who has never played organised sports would make such a statement.As someone who's played organised sports his whole life, I find myself in shock that someone would fail to believe or understand the importance of motivation, or the subtle changes that infect AN ENTIRE TEAM (not just one or two individuals). Emotions are contangious...that's why you always here about LEADERS on teams, and why they are so important.

I wrestled and played football in high school, played DII college basketball, and if it weren't for poker I'd probably be coaching basketball in some way right now, but I think thats all meaningless. Theres a ton of 'conventional wisdom' in sports that is just flat out wrong. As was said in this thread, you guys look back and use hindsight to justify these emotions. For example "the Redskins used the tragedy of Sean Taylor's passing to spur them onto a strong end of the season." Thats completely bogus. The Redskins were always a pretty good team throughout the year, they just had a bunch of close losses. Furthermore Gibbs has had a history of diong well in December. Now they have a strong December and start to get those breaks that they weren't getting earlier in the year and everyone wants to say its that they're "coming together through tragedy." Its bogus imo.

 

[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 response is not topical. The argument is that there is no teamwide elavation of performance. To point out individual decrease in performance cases has nothing to do with the premise.

Actually, there are multiple arguments, including post #41's suggestion that 99% of NFL players play a full 100% every game. This post is perfectly topical.

Either I'm exceptional(because I always gave full effort in sports games I played) or 99% of pro athletes do indeed give it their all. Personally, I think its the latter.

 

[bcr8f]

When a player goes down players around him step up and take up the slack.

Why didn't they step up before?

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

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 response is not topical. The argument is that there is no teamwide elavation of performance. To point out individual decrease in performance cases has nothing to do with the premise.

Actually, there are multiple arguments, including post #41's suggestion that 99% of NFL players play a full 100% every game. This post is perfectly topical.

Either I'm exceptional(because I always gave full effort in sports games I played) or 99% of pro athletes do indeed give it their all. Personally, I think its the latter.

Overall, I find your assertions interesting and compelling. People dramatically overstate a team's emotional state to predict games. While it seems likely that emotions play a factor in different matchups, your point really seems to be that we cannot predict in advance which teams will be "up" and which will be "down" in a given week. Is that what you're getting at? Or are you literally saying that it never happens, teams never have an "emotional letdown"? Just trying to fully understand.A few comments about your pickup b-ball example:

- I don't believe that you truly give full effort 16 games per year.

- I do believe that you *think* you give full effort -- but in reality, do you REALLY go extra hard after EVERY loose ball 16 games per year?

- If you had to practice full-out, 4-5 times per week for 3-4 hours each day, would you STILL go all out 16 times per year? Doubt it.

- The speed at which you play b-ball isn't even comparable to a pro athlete, nor is the toll on your body at all similar, so it's difficult to understand why this analogy was even relevant.

 

[GregR_2]

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.

Just because there are games where favorites win trap games doesn't rule out that the trap game situation may be a cause of teams losing more than they would have in a non-trap game situation. You are resorting to the same type of argument that you are complaining about. If you want to say something meaningful on it you need to show that teams facing a trap game situation are no more likely to lose than teams that face the same kind of underdog but without the big opponent the following week.

 

[BILLY_THE_BULL]

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.

Mental Performance Index "The MPI or Mental Performance Index is the first system of scoring developed in sports which includes in the scoring key mental factors such as pressure management, reduction of mental errors and focused execution. It was developed by licensed clinical and sport performance psychologist Dr. John F. Murray in 2002 to show the extreme importance of mental factors in sports. It is much more accurate than the final score and other statistics in showing how one team performed relative to another team. It has almost perfectly estimated the relative performance of the teams before each of the past 5 Super Bowls. Dr. Murray's MPI forecast has also beaten the official Super Bowl spread 4 out of 5 times now. He has appeared on hundreds of radio and television shows, and the forecast has also appeared in hundreds of articles. Why all the focus, energy and interest in this topic? Because it so clearly demonstrates the importance of mental factors in sports."

http://www.johnfmurray.com/News.aspx?id=591

Special to JohnFMurray.com - Below is the latest and most complete review of the Mental Performance Index (MPI) after 5 public uses in worldwide media before the Super Bowl. For a concise graph of the MPI record after 5 years, go to the MPI Track Record page at this link. ... and for the ongoing 41 week study of the Super Bowl, go to MentalPerformanceIndex.com

The Mental Performance Index or "MPI" is the first ever measure of mental performance used in sport (in this case American Football).

The index was developed by Dr. John F. Murray, a licensed clinical and sport performance psychologist in 2002 to demonstrate the importance of mental factors in football such as "pressure management," "focused execution," and "reduction of mental errors."

In 2007, Dr. Murray began using the MPI in a 41-week study to determine the most domintant team in Super Bowl history, and to discover the factors most highly correlated with winning (e.g., offense, defense, special teams, pressure offense, pressure defense, total pressure, or other factors). Weekly reports and analyses are provided at MentalPerformanceIndex.com.

A comparison of teams across weeks or decades was made possible with a scoring system that standardizes relative team performance as a "degree of perfection" analogous to a baseball player's batting average on a scale of .000 to 1.000. Scoring reflects both physical and mental performance, to support Dr. Murray's contention that the MPI reveals "actual performance" much better than final scores and traditional statitistics which fail to account for all the plays in the game and do not capture important mental elements or situational meaningfulness.

The MPI uses a very objective scoring system based on team execution play by play, but with an added professional interpretation component to account for the realities of a game and require expert analysis (e.g., pressure, mental errors).

To test the accuracy, reliability and practicality of the MPI, Dr. Murray has spent the past 5 years before every Super Bowl on television and radio, discussing the MPI statistics and giving an intepretation on how the teams are performing entering the game.

In the first three major public tests in media worldwide, the MPI almost perfectly estimated the ultimate performance of the teams in the Super Bowl (Super Bowl XXXVII 2003, Super Bowl XXXVIII 2004, and Super Bowl XXXIX 2005), beating the spread each time, going counter to public opinion, and correctly estimating the ultimate course of the games.

In 2003 the Oakland Raiders were favored to win (estimates ranged from 4 to 9) over the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. The MPI showed that Tampa Bay, by contrast, was far superior.

In 2004 and 2005, the MPI analysis showed the teams to be relatively equal and forecasted a very close contest even though the New England Patriots were predicted to win by at least 7 points in each game. The 2004 game was tied with 4 seconds remaining (3 point New England win) and the 2005 game was the first game in Super Bowl history to be tied entering the final quarter of play. New England won by 3.

In 2006 (Super Bowl XL), the MPI accurately forecast that Seattle would perform better on offense and defense and worse on special teams than the Pittsburgh Steelers. The MPI forecast that Seattle would perform better overall was correct, but the lower performing team on the MPI won. At least 20 newspapers wrote about the success of the MPI before the game, and ABC TV in West Palm Beach interviewed Dr. Murray from his Palm Beach office about the system. Bloomberg Radio interviewed Dr. Murray about the Super Bowl four years in a row. Seattle Coach Mike Holmgrem stated after the game that his team had to face two opponents, the Steelers and the officials. It was an extremely unusual game filled with mistakes, and a few huge plays (a flea flicker, long pass, and record breaking 75 yard run from scrimmage) accounted for all of Pittsburgh's points. Seattle missed countless opportunities to put the game away despite performing better by all accounts. The MPI forecast against the spread fell to 3-1, but accurately showed Seattle's superior performance.

The forecast rose to 4-1 against the spread in 2007 Super Bowl XLI as the MPI perfectly estimated the relative performance of the teams as well as the Indianapolis Colts easy defeat of the Chicago Bears. The pre-game forecast, published and broadcast widely, showed that the Colts in the playoffs had performed better on the total score, offense, defense, special teams, pressure offense, pressure defense, and total pressure situations.

The MPI forecast indicated that a 2 or 3 touchdown victory was imminent when the Cols were favored by 7 1/2 points. Precisely as forecasted, the Colts dominated in all seven categories and also won the game by two touchdowns, 29-17. The accurate forecast was published in the Los Angeles Times, in a front page story in the Palm Beach Daily News, in the Indianapolis Star and in several other major newspapers before the game. Dr. Murray also appeared on FOX national television the week before the game. The 4-1 success of the MPI was also covered after the game and the MPI will continue to be used each year to forecast the performance of the teams entering the Super Bowl.

 

[GregR_2]

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.

Mental Performance Index "The MPI or Mental Performance Index is the first system of scoring developed in sports which includes in the scoring key mental factors such as pressure management, reduction of mental errors and focused execution. It was developed by licensed clinical and sport performance psychologist Dr. John F. Murray in 2002 to show the extreme importance of mental factors in sports. It is much more accurate than the final score and other statistics in showing how one team performed relative to another team. It has almost perfectly estimated the relative performance of the teams before each of the past 5 Super Bowls. Dr. Murray's MPI forecast has also beaten the official Super Bowl spread 4 out of 5 times now. He has appeared on hundreds of radio and television shows, and the forecast has also appeared in hundreds of articles. Why all the focus, energy and interest in this topic? Because it so clearly demonstrates the importance of mental factors in sports."

Tried to find a page that explains how the MPI works. As someone educated in the sciences, that site reads exactly like someone trying to pass himself off as an expert. When I read things like:

To test the accuracy, reliability and practicality of the MPI, Dr. Murray has spent the past 5 years before every Super Bowl on television and radio, discussing the MPI statistics and giving an intepretation on how the teams are performing entering the game.

It is a huge warning flag the guy isn't doing good science here, and is instead just trying to pump himself up. His idea of testing the accuracy of a method is to go do radio interviews about it? The message he is getting across all through that site is, "I'm an expert, put me on your show! Other people did, so I must be one!"

 

[BILLY_THE_BULL]

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.

Mental Performance Index "The MPI or Mental Performance Index is the first system of scoring developed in sports which includes in the scoring key mental factors such as pressure management, reduction of mental errors and focused execution. It was developed by licensed clinical and sport performance psychologist Dr. John F. Murray in 2002 to show the extreme importance of mental factors in sports. It is much more accurate than the final score and other statistics in showing how one team performed relative to another team. It has almost perfectly estimated the relative performance of the teams before each of the past 5 Super Bowls. Dr. Murray's MPI forecast has also beaten the official Super Bowl spread 4 out of 5 times now. He has appeared on hundreds of radio and television shows, and the forecast has also appeared in hundreds of articles. Why all the focus, energy and interest in this topic? Because it so clearly demonstrates the importance of mental factors in sports."

Tried to find a page that explains how the MPI works. As someone educated in the sciences, that site reads exactly like someone trying to pass himself off as an expert. When I read things like:

To test the accuracy, reliability and practicality of the MPI, Dr. Murray has spent the past 5 years before every Super Bowl on television and radio, discussing the MPI statistics and giving an intepretation on how the teams are performing entering the game.

It is a huge warning flag the guy isn't doing good science here, and is instead just trying to pump himself up. His idea of testing the accuracy of a method is to go do radio interviews about it? The message he is getting across all through that site is, "I'm an expert, put me on your show! Other people did, so I must be one!"

I agree he is trying to pimp himself but it looks like there could be some merit to his "assumptions". Also I think(not 100% sure) that he is probably like those guys on TV with their Lead Pipe Lock Picks and 20 Star Bets for the year stuff like that. So if that is the case I doubt he is going to show the inner workings of MPI and will instead just show the results of it.