[marq=left]For comparison, we are +32 in points scored vs points allowed. The Dolphins are +14. We're 5-9, they're 9-5. [/marq]

"You are what your record says you are" is a bromide spewed by people who don't want to analyze the situation too closely.

---

+1 for the scrolly thing. Man, I want one of those... maybe I could get somebody to pay attention to something I posted if I had it.........

Tennessee: +147 (12-2)
NY Giants: +128 (11-3)
Baltimore: +112 (9-5)
Pittsburgh: +110 (11-3)
Philadelphia: +96 (8-5-1)
Carolina: +89 (11-3)
NY Jets: +66 (9-5)
Tampa Bay: +62 (9-5)
Atlanta: +55 (9-5)
Minnesota: +52 (9-5)
Indianapolis: +49 (10-4)
New England: +48 (9-5)
San Diego: +44 (6-8)
Dallas: +44 (9-5)
New Orleans Saints: +39 (7-7)
Green Bay: +32 (5-9)
Chicago: +29 (8-6)
Arizona: +28 (8-6)
Miami: +14 (9-5)
Buffalo: 0 (6-8)
Houston: -24 (7-7)
Washington: -35 (7-7)
Jacksonville: -38 (5-9)
Denver: -40 (8-6)
San Francisco: -46 (5-9)
Cleveland: -73 (4-10)
Seattle: -95 (3-11)
Kansas City: -132 (2-12)
Oakland: -143 (3-11)
Cincinnati: -184 (2-11)
Detroit: -204 (0-14)
St. Louis: -228 (2-12)

If net points mean anything, GB and San Diego are the two unlucky teams, and Denver is the lucky team.

I wouldn't feel wrong saying that San Diego should have a better record than they do this year, either.

---

Yeah we are one of I guess three teams that won't make the playoffs from the bunch.

---

Here's a graphical representation of it (point differential on the X-axis, wins on the Y-axis)... please note that the extrapolated line is in no way statistically calculated. I just eyeballed it.

---

Hey, MassPackFan, I just plotted winning percentage (counting ties as half wins, half losses) vs. scoring differential, and it turns out there 's a 0.8538 linear correlation R-squared value -- pretty damn good.

If we take out the three obvious anomalies (San Diego, Green Bay, and Denver), that correlation rises to 0.9167.

Plugging Green Bay's current scoring differential into the linear equation gives us a projected winning percentage of .5776, or in other words, a record of 8-6.

In other words, there's no way, statistically, that the Packers should have a losing record with a scoring differential of +32.

EDIT: Holy shit, MassPackFan beat me to the punch.

---

OK, Mass...


Now kindly represent the mean, median and mode of the differentals, couple with a truncated mean of same.

or....


Get me some mean, truncated linemen in order to render the analysis moot.

:thumbleft:

Sorry, a fine graph... I just can't help myself sometimes.

Thanks NSD, I really didn't feel like going over and hopping on a computer with SAS installed, and never ran that on Excel before. :lol:

Yeah, I figured the correlation would be pretty high just by looking at how the scatter plot came out. Thanks!

---

Just for shits and giggles, I plugged the +32 scoring differential into the uncorrected linear regression and came up with a winning percentage of .5669 -- again, a record of 8-6.

---