Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Patriots play last 2 games at HOME 4 Years in a Row (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter gcoast3
- Start date
The first one......but I could really care less....I’m a KC fan....but I,m not gonna bury my head in the sand and act like it doesn’t seem a little “funny”..lol
If it was the Chiefs 4 years in a row instead....I would be raising my eyebrows too.....
Last edited by a moderator:
Deamon
Footballguy
Really? You'd rather 3 road games in a row? I think you'd be in the minority and that Bill would rather option B for sure. That is an absolute brutal amount of travel in a row. They will be flying to LA and spending 2 weeks in hotels away from home, then flying back to Boston, and then flying south to Miami. Or you take one road trip to LA, then spend 2 weeks at home, and finish the season with one flight to Miami.
I know you're invested into sticking to your point of view, but I don't think there's a player or coach in the league would prefer going AAAHH over AAHHA. The fact is, if you swapped weeks 15 and 17, the Pats would be HAPPIER, and the people calling this some conspiracy would be Happier too.
The Pats got screwed with their schedule by having the final two games at home this year, and it would be more advantageous for them if they actually had that Jets home game in week 15 and a road game to Miami in week 17. So it's the opposite "funny" when the last two at home actually hurts them this year.
I think it is really weird that 4 years in a row NE has their last two games at home.
Deamon
Footballguy
If home / away is determined at random, the likelihood that a team would end a year with two home games is 1 out of 4. The chances of that happening in four straight seasons is 1 out of 256. That’s not all that rare—even as an avowed Patriots hater, this is much ado about very little.
Deamon
Footballguy
Ya it's quite ridiculous. Also, the Pats always host the Bills week 16. It seems to be tradition. So really, it's a 1 in 2 chance that the final game of the year is at home, so you could say it's only 1 in 16 chance of it happening.pecorino said:
And again, the two home games screws the pats as it creates 3 aways in a row.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Agreed, it’s odd.
Patrtiots haven't always host the Bills in Week 16. Just in the last 4 years. Maybe the Bills would like to host the Patriots in late December.
Deamon
Footballguy
Deamon
Footballguy
If your question is the same as what you asked me about how I would want to finish the last five....I stand by 3 on the road and then 2 at home.....is it possible you cold be over estimating the 3 on the road as much as you are under estimating the final two at home....
I would sign up for a three game road trip in weeks 13-15 every year if I got the last two at home.....it’s a one game difference and I would think my team could handle it...give me the hammer if I need it....
plus...I haven’t looked it up....but I would venture to guess that this is the first time in those four years that the last two home games are actually preceded by a three game road trip...
And with them getting to stay in LA ....it isn’t even really three different road games so to speak this time....
Last edited by a moderator:
Deamon
Footballguy
That's not what I asked, but I kind of assumed you would dance around the question and answer a different question instead.
Would you think it would be more advantageous to have the pats swap weeks 15 and 17 (eliminating the 3 road games in a row), or not?
Assuming you'll ignore or find a way around this one too. Just answer it man.
Deamon
Footballguy
I'm willing to bet you're in the great minority here and only saying this to prove your 'point'. You would 'think your team could handle it?". No one wants to play 3 road in a row, its absolutely brutal and is not an 'over estimation'.
Staying in LA doesn't change much. They are away from their homes for almost a month, and having to fly from LA to Boston then back to Florida is super rough. The Pats would surely love to swap weeks 15 and 17.
No I doubt they have had 3 in a row road games prior. So if you're just going off the previous years, even if it was drawn out of a hat, they'd have a 1 in 64 chance of having the last 2 games at home for those 3 years. That is TINY statistically. Even the 1 in 256 isn't that crazy (plus they screwed them this year by doing it)
And if we're talking about this specific team and situation, their week 17 games haven't mattered a couple of those years, so it would have been better for them to have the games that mattered mid season at home.
You guys are realllllllly stretching here to try to make something out of nothing just because it's the Patriots.
Deamon
Footballguy
On top of all this, the Pats have the hardest schedule in the league this year. Not only the strongest SOS from last year, but also very very tough early games for a new QB, an early bye week (not good), and one of 4 teams to have 3 straight road games. Anyone thinking the schedule makers were biased towards giving them a favourable schedule are absolutely out to lunch.
No. Two of the away games involve no travel between games and then they have 10 days before the go to Miami.
Deamon....if you see no benefit in having the last two games of the season at home then there really is no discussion to be had with you. If you don't think it's even just a little strange that it has only ever happened to the Patriots 4 years in a row, then there really is no discussion to be had with you.
Obviously other people do. If you think that is dumb....fine. Other people might think your stance is burying your head in the sand and that is fine too. It's ok to see things differently.
And no one is arguing that there may be a "more difficult stretch" somewhere earlier in the schedule that kind of "makes up for it". But that doesn't make it seem any less strange.
I have no dog in the race, I could care less. I am not a conspiracy theorist and I don't think big Rog told the schedule makers to make sure the Patriots have two home games to end every season because he is buddies with Kraft. But I am a rationale human being and do think it is a little strange no matter what the "odds" say.
I also feel the extra 4 days they spend in LA is an advantage as compared to having to make an entire another trip across country at some other time. Being away from family or whatever for 4 more days is nothing to professional athletes. They will be gone less than a week total. They actually get to adjust and stay in the same time zone, etc. And they get a 10 day rest on the back end....so just like other things, that should "make up for it". I really can't think of any disadvantage (other then playing on short rest Sun then Thursday) but that happens a lot to many teams every year.
I bet your view might be different if the Patriots ended the season on the road the last two games of the season.....4 seasons in a row. Or would that not raise your eyebrows?
I know you are probably one that likes to have the last word no matter what, even if dying on a hill, so I will stop now and let you have the last word....you are right....nothing to see here.....cheers...
Obviously other people do. If you think that is dumb....fine. Other people might think your stance is burying your head in the sand and that is fine too. It's ok to see things differently.
And no one is arguing that there may be a "more difficult stretch" somewhere earlier in the schedule that kind of "makes up for it". But that doesn't make it seem any less strange.
I have no dog in the race, I could care less. I am not a conspiracy theorist and I don't think big Rog told the schedule makers to make sure the Patriots have two home games to end every season because he is buddies with Kraft. But I am a rationale human being and do think it is a little strange no matter what the "odds" say.
I also feel the extra 4 days they spend in LA is an advantage as compared to having to make an entire another trip across country at some other time. Being away from family or whatever for 4 more days is nothing to professional athletes. They will be gone less than a week total. They actually get to adjust and stay in the same time zone, etc. And they get a 10 day rest on the back end....so just like other things, that should "make up for it". I really can't think of any disadvantage (other then playing on short rest Sun then Thursday) but that happens a lot to many teams every year.
I bet your view might be different if the Patriots ended the season on the road the last two games of the season.....4 seasons in a row. Or would that not raise your eyebrows?
I know you are probably one that likes to have the last word no matter what, even if dying on a hill, so I will stop now and let you have the last word....you are right....nothing to see here.....cheers...
Last edited by a moderator:
Deamon
Footballguy
Sure there is benefit to any 2 games at home. Last 2 weeks? Maybe a small boost, but look how good that did the Pats last year. They played at home and lost to Miami, so how valuable is it really?Deamon....if you see no benefit in having the last two games of the season at home then there really is no discussion to be had with you. If you don't think it's even just a little strange that it has only ever happened to the Patriots 4 years in a row, then there really is no discussion to be had with you.
Obviously other people do. If you think that is dumb....fine. Other people might think your stance is burying your head in the sand and that is fine too. It's ok to see things differently.
And no one is arguing that there may be a "more difficult stretch" somewhere earlier in the schedule that kind of "makes up for it". But that doesn't make it seem any less strange.
I have no dog in the race, I could care less. I am not a conspiracy theorist and I don't think big Rog told the schedule makers to make sure the Patriots have two home games to end every season because he is buddies with Kraft. But I am a rationale human being and do think it is a little strange no matter what the "odds" say.
I also feel the extra 4 days they spend in LA is an advantage as compared to having to make an entire another trip across country at some other time. Being away from family or whatever for 4 more days is nothing to professional athletes. They will be gone less than a week total. They actually get to adjust and stay in the same time zone, etc. And they get a 10 day rest on the back end....so just like other things, that should "make up for it". I really can't think of any disadvantage (other then playing on short rest Sun then Thursday) but that happens a lot to many teams every year.
I bet your view might be different if the Patriots ended the season on the road the last two games of the season.....4 seasons in a row. Or would that not raise your eyebrows?
I know you are probably one that likes to have the last word no matter what, even if dying on a hill, so I will stop now and let you have the last word....you are right....nothing to see here.....cheers...
And why does it matter if they are the "only team that it happened to?" If it was the Jets, would this even be a thread? Can you honestly answer that? I'm sure there are other scenarios where there's one team that only got back to back home games in weeks 9 and 10 for 4 years in a row too (which for the Pats the last few years, would have been more beneficial)... is there threads on that? No.
As for other stretches, sure it makes up for it. In fact it MORE than makes up for it as the week 15 and 17 games being swapped would have helped them. If anything, the final two home games tries to make up for the brutal 3 in a row but doesn't fully accomplish that. You also COMPLETELY (likely purposely) just choose to ignore their brutal road games for a young QB being early in the season, and also having the toughest SOS in the nfl this year (nothing to do with schedule makers as opponents are predetermined... something gcoast didn't seem to be aware of)
The double LA argument is ridiculous, almost like you think it's some 'favour' to them. They do this all the time to eliminate travel. Jets have the same thing this year (they do the Seattle/LA one together as they likely weren't able to do the back to back LA games together). Playing on a short week is tough, especially staying in a hotel and not being in your home stadium for it.
No I would say nothing if the Pats played on the road 4 season in a row. Again, I am in no way a Patriots fan at all. Statistically, a 1 in 256 scenario is not in the slightest bit 'weird' or worth 'raising your eyebrows over'. But I'm sure you're good at math and know that.
No, I do not care about the last word as much as you. In fact it seems like you are so focused on 'being right' that you would answer that 3 away and 2 home is better just to not waiver your point. Your reputation precedes you.
Nonetheless, even if I don't cheer for the Pats, it's starting to look a little desperate in order to drum up some 'fishiness'. The facts are that 1 in 256 is nothing to raise your eyebrows at, it actually hurts them this year by having it (probably has in previous years too as they lost meaningful 'home' games), the home game thing proved to be irrelevant in the Miami game last year, If you don't think this is a conspiracy but it's just "odd" then what are you suggesting? Sure, it's 'odd' the coin flip came up heads 8 times in a row, but you agree it is random chance but just a neat stat, then no point for the thread. This being brought up as an issue is such a failure at understanding odds, scheduling, and advantages.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
