The NFL

Does it strike anyone else as odd there are no undefeated teams left this early in the season?

I admit it isn't as strange as the fact there are three winless teams, and none of them is Detroit.

At last a decent topic to discuss.

I'm not surprised at there being no undefeated teams remaining after week 5. What did we have last year, Indy and New Orleans almost doing what the Patriots unbelieveably did a few years ago? Indy came in weaker, for reasons that made no sense they gave up their shot at it last year, they've got the biggest whiner in the league in Manning, and NO was THE LUCKIEST team in the league last season with balls bouncing their way in almost every close game. I thought Baltimore might have a chance and the Patriots looked like a long shot but have an unknown defense. This year might be one of those years where a Tampa Bay might win it all.

Not to me. This is exactly what the NFL wants. All 32 teams to be either 7-8 or 8-7 so they have 16 meaningful games the last week.

This is why the NFL sucks...but fun to bet!

Thanks, good question. I was, and still am, in need of some good "Ask the Wizard" questions. To get at the answer, let's assume each team has a probability of winning any given game equal to their win ratio from the 2009 regular season. Note that there were no ties in 2009. The following table shows the probability each team will not have a perfect record by this point. This is 1-(1-p)^n, where p is the probability of winning each game, and n is the number of games played so far this season. To find the probability nobody has a perfect record, take the product of this probability for all 32 teams. That probability comes to 2.96%. Let's just call it 3%, since this methodology is rather rough.

Team	09 Wins	09 Losses	Win Ratio	Games Played	Not Perfect
New England Patriots	10	6	62.50%	4	84.7412%
New York Jets	9	7	56.25%	5	94.3686%
Miami Dolphins	7	9	43.75%	4	96.3364%
Buffalo Bills	6	10	37.50%	5	99.2584%
Cincinnati Bengals	10	6	62.50%	5	90.4633%
Baltimore Ravens	9	7	56.25%	5	94.3686%
Pittsburgh Steelers	9	7	56.25%	4	89.9887%
Cleveland Browns	5	11	31.25%	5	99.7020%
Indianapolis Colts	14	2	87.50%	5	48.7091%
Houston Texans	9	7	56.25%	5	94.3686%
Tennessee Titans	8	8	50.00%	5	96.8750%
Jacksonville Jaguars	7	9	43.75%	5	98.3972%
San Diego Chargers	13	3	81.25%	5	64.5907%
Denver Broncos	8	8	50.00%	5	96.8750%
Oakland Raiders	5	11	31.25%	5	99.7020%
Kansas City Chiefs	4	12	25.00%	4	99.6094%
Dallas Cowboys	11	5	68.75%	4	77.6596%
Philadelphia Eagles	11	5	68.75%	5	84.6410%
New York Giants	8	8	50.00%	5	96.8750%
Washington Redskins	4	12	25.00%	5	99.9023%
Minnesota Vikings	12	4	75.00%	4	68.3594%
Green Bay Packers	11	5	68.75%	5	84.6410%
Chicago Bears	7	9	43.75%	5	98.3972%
Detroit Lions	2	14	12.50%	5	99.9969%
New Orleans Saints	13	3	81.25%	5	64.5907%
Atlanta Falcons	9	7	56.25%	5	94.3686%
Carolina Panthers	8	8	50.00%	5	96.8750%
Tampa Bay Buccaneers	3	13	18.75%	4	99.8764%
Arizona Cardinals	10	6	62.50%	5	90.4633%
San Francisco 49ers	8	8	50.00%	5	96.8750%
Seattle Seahawks	5	11	31.25%	4	99.0463%
St. Louis Rams	1	15	6.25%	5	99.9999%

Before the many perfectionists out there correct me, I admit to the following flaws in my methodology. I think these are very minor flaws, and not worth hand wringing over, but in the interests of full disclosure, here they are:

1. Using the 2009 win-loss record is obviously a crude estimate of the win probability this year. For example, if a team went 0-16, or 16-0, it would not be reasonably to say that team had a 0% or 100% chance to win each game this year.
2. The above assumes independence between each trail. In reality, each game must result in one win and one loss, or two ties. In theory my methodology could result in every team winning, or every team losing, every game, which is obviously impossible.
3. I did not consider the strength of schedule of each team. If the strongest teams played weak teams the first 4-5 games, it would increase the probability of going 5 and 0. I did not consider the individual match ups at all.

Quote: Nareed

Does it strike anyone else as odd there are no undefeated teams left this early in the season?

I admit it isn't as strange as the fact there are three winless teams, and none of them is Detroit.

I was actually surprised it took the Lions until week 5 to get a win... they are not the 2008 edition of the Lions. Of course, they are a punchline, and I'm a Homer for them, so I've probably bitten on the bait here....

I am a little surprised there's no winless team, and I don't think this is what the NFL wants. They don't want a whole bunch of 7,8 and 9 win teams. That doesn't make for interesting stories. They want some top teams, but they also want those teams to have an entertaining match against the bottom teams. Blow outs are only fun when your team has won in the last dozen games, and the last blow out was in 1995....

Quote: thecesspit

...I don't think this is what the NFL wants.

I tend to disagree. I think it is good for football to have as many competitive games, and teams with hope to make the playoffs, as possible. Yes, I know that games between two outstanding teams make for great watching, but that is balanced by the many games with two lousy teams that have little or no hope to make the playoffs.

It would be interesting to see statistics on television ratings on the Sunday and Monday night games by the point spread. I'd wager to say the games with the small point spreads get better ratings.

The League naturally wants all teams to be competitive, but it's not realistic to expect a season to end with all teams at 8-8. In fact, that would be a disaster given the NFL's tie-breaking criteria. Naturally some teams will be better than others and some teams will win only a few games. Sometimes one tam has a long winning streak like the Pats did not too long ago.

I think the League is satisfied if some playoff slots don't get decided until the last week.

What the fans want is to see their team win every game by a blowout, but again most of them don't expect that to happen. So we settle for winning the Superbowl, however our team gets there (Ideally with a 14-2 or 15-1 regular season record and playing every playoff game at home), and however it manages to win (ideally in a blowout).

Now, since only one team wins the Superbowl and only two teams play it, most fans want to see a close game. Ditto for Monday and Sunday night games.

Trivia time: how many teams have never reached the Superbowl? Bonus: name them.

I am guessing 6:

JAX
TEN
HOU
CLE
DET
ATL

Am I right?

edit: Make that 5. Ten/Stl in 99

4 : Jacksonville Jaguars, Cleveland Browns, Detroit Lions and Houston Texans.

2 of these are expansion teams and have had much less opportunities, another was disappeared for a time. The Lions have no such excuse, and have won exactly 1 play off game since 1950.

In the last ten years we've struck off Baltimore, Carolina, Tampa Bay, Seattle, Arizona and New Orleans.

I don't see the list getting shorter this year, but could be wrong about the Texans...

Quote: avargov

I am guessing 6:
TEN

How quickly they forget! Remember the Music City Miracle? They lost the Superbowl to Kurt Warner's Rams in the very last play.

edit: Just saw your edit. Sorry.

Quote:

ATL

Lost to Denver in 98 or so. John Elway beat his old coach Dan Reeves.

I think San Diego played in one, but I'm not sure.

Quote: Nareed

Lost to Denver in 98 or so. John Elway beat his old coach Dan Reeves.

I think San Diego played in one, but I'm not sure.

Mid-90's.

The Chargers have always been the forgotten team for me growing up... I always forgot they existed, and was surprised to learn they did on several occasions :)

(I grew up in the UK... we tended to get East Coast games on TV if any).

Quote: thecesspit

4 : Jacksonville Jaguars, Cleveland Browns, Detroit Lions and Houston Texans.

That matches my count.

Quote:

2 of these are expansion teams and have had much less opportunities, another was disappeared for a time.

Actually three are expansion teams. The Browns moved to Baltimore and took a new name. They left the old name for an expansion team to be set up in Cleveland. In theory they became a new team, the Ravens, and the expansion team in Ohio retook the old team's record and history. It's confusing.

In any case Jacksonville got to the league the same year as Carolina, and Cleveland I think a couple of years later. So they've all been around a while (of course it took the Bucs and Seahawks more than 20 years to reach a Superbowl). Houston was founded in '04, if memory serves.

Quote:

The Lions have no such excuse, and have won exactly 1 play off game since 1950.

The Lions look even worse considering they had championship teams in the 50s.

Now, how many teams have not won a Superbowl? ;)

Id say 44, as I think thats how many Super Bowls there have been.

Although you could extend that to all the teams each year who didnt win it, as opposed to the one that did. Thats a number I cannot be bothered researching right now.

Quote: Nareed

That matches my count.

Actually three are expansion teams. The Browns moved to Baltimore and took a new name. They left the old name for an expansion team to be set up in Cleveland. In theory they became a new team, the Ravens, and the expansion team in Ohio retook the old team's record and history. It's confusing.

In any case Jacksonville got to the league the same year as Carolina, and Cleveland I think a couple of years later. So they've all been around a while (of course it took the Bucs and Seahawks more than 20 years to reach a Superbowl). Houston was founded in '04, if memory serves.

About right I think. Note that New Orleans took a lifetime to get to the bowl as well.

I don't think the Browns are 'officially' an expansion team, the Ravens are the expansion team and the Browns got to keep all the history and franchise records. Which is why I claim the Brown just disappeared for a few years... :)

The Lions are the only original team to have never made the big dance, it's true. They are the only team never to have official Cheerleaders as well, though there's some group trying to be an unofficial cheer squad. Sad times, if you ask me, Football needs cheer leaders the same way a good steak needs a fully loaded, twice-baked potato... if the steak is good, the trimmings are immaterial.

Quote:

The Lions look even worse considering they had championship teams in the 50s.

It was 1963 when Clay Ford took over the team and since then there's been one win (a beautiful thrashing of the Cowboys, with the Silver Stretch in full effect, Perriman/Moore/Sanders doing an awesome job. The Redkins Hogs then went on to destroy Erik Kramer in the following game).

Quote: thecesspit

Note that New Orleans took a lifetime to get to the bowl as well.

And half a lifetime to get a winning season.

Atlanta took nearly as long to get two winning seasons in a row.

Quote:

I don't think the Browns are 'officially' an expansion team, the Ravens are the expansion team and the Browns got to keep all the history and franchise records. Which is why I claim the Brown just disappeared for a few years... :)

As I said: it's confusing.

I preffer to think of the Ravens as the former Browns (as I think of the Titans as the former Oilers), and the current Cleveland team as the Ersatz Browns.

Quote:

Sad times, if you ask me, Football needs cheer leaders the same way a good steak needs a fully loaded, twice-baked potato... if the steak is good, the trimmings are immaterial.

The NFL's been running a billboard ad here with photos of cheerleaders in action with the words "And there's a game besides."

The Steelers don't have cheerleaders now, but I've read they did in the past.

Quote: Croupier

Id say 44, as I think thats how many Super Bowls there have been.

Ok, ok. I'm supposed to be working and I make mistakes (and you should see the quality of my work!)

How many teams have never won a Superbowl.

Quote: Nareed

Ok, ok. I'm supposed to be working and I make mistakes (and you should see the quality of my work!)

Pass. But surely you should give me points for my logic.

Quote: thecesspit

Cleveland Browns, Detroit Lions

These two teams will do their darndest every year to make sure they remain on that list--you can count on that.

Quote: teddys

These two teams will do their darndest every year to make sure they remain on that list--you can count on that.

The Ersatz Browns are too young to make that determination.

The former Browns looked like they loved losing to Denver in a dramatic fasion. Twice they came very close to winning the AFC championship against the Broncos. Once they were done in by The Fumble, the other by The Drive.

They may have found consolation int he fact that they'd ahve lost two Superbowls without dignity, the way the Broncos did.

Detroit, now, I suppose the people who live there, if any, would like to get an NFL team someday ;)

Seriously, a large part of how well a team does is how management runs it. There's no single right way to do it, but there are well-run teams and badly-run teams. The former are consistent contenders, though of course they may go through bad times. The latter are consistently near the bottom, though they may have a good year every now and then.

Of course the quality of management varies through time. While the Steelers are usually well-run, the Rooneys let Chuck Noll hang on to his job well past the time he could do their team any good. Jerry Jones did extremely well with the Cowboys when he acquired them, but not so well since Aikman retired. The Dolphins had a glory decade in the 70s, they even achieved the ever-more-legendary perfect season, but since Shula left they've been aimlessly stumbling all over the palce.

Quote: Nareed

The Ersatz Browns are too young to make that determination.

Naw. Ten years is enough. The new management has shown time and again that they have NO commitment to quality of any kind. I lump them with the Lions because they have enough fans to keep them going even without having a good team. They just have no desire to get better, and I don't see that changing in the near future, or even in the far future.

Note this doesn't apply to the Old Browns who were actually decent at times and of course won a Superbowl with pretty much the same players/staff after they moved to Baltimore.