Does a .500 winning percentage in NFL mean anything?

#76
#76
DeusExMachina said:
Howie and VFTX, thank you. I knew I wasn't the only one not blinded by Gru-bage's SERPER BERHL RIIIIIIIING.

And lest I forget to do my daily dose of truth....Gruden's record was what, 94-81?? I know that he was TWO GAMES OVER 500 in six years as the HC of the Bucs (52-50). That leaves 42-31 as a HC in the AFC West (OAK, SD, DEN, and KC).

For those that don't know, the NFC South (TB, CAR, ATL, NO) is the SEC of the NFL. The AFC West......kinda like the Mountain West.

Bad competition, Gruden is +11 over .500.

Good competition, barely above .500.

#grudenisGARBAGE
Click to expand...


Does anyone do any research anymore before they post? This is what is wrong with people is that stuff comes out without checking the facts. Gruden coached the Raiders from 1998-2001. It so happens that the Denver Broncos, in the same division, won the Super Bowl in January if 1999. Additionally, the division was very competitive in 1999 and Denver won 11 games, a game behind Oakland in 2000. You have to remember that Shanahan was at Denver at the time. So you want to take back that comment about the division being like the MWC?

It is tough to win on a regular basis in the NFL. The league is built for parity. It is part of the reason why it is so popular. It is tough to win a Super Bowl. Just ask the last few teams with the best records in the regular season.
 
#77
#77
VolGee4 said:
Does anyone do any research anymore before they post?
Click to expand...

LOL, ya need to follow your own advice. Do yourself and all the other Grubageites a favor. It's not difficult, I promise. Go look up how many years from 2002-2008 where Monte Kiffin (the DC in Tampa for Gruden's tenure) had a top-10 defense. Go ahead, I'll wait. I think you'll also notice that the offense (Gruden's side of the house) was pretty bad, bordering on putrid.

Go ahead, I'll wait.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#78
#78
DeusExMachina said:
LOL, ya need to follow your own advice. Do yourself and all the other Grubageites a favor. It's not difficult, I promise. Go look up how many years from 2002-2008 where Monte Kiffin (the DC in Tampa for Gruden's tenure) had a top-10 defense. Go ahead, I'll wait. I think you'll also notice that the offense (Gruden's side of the house) was pretty bad, bordering on putrid.

Go ahead, I'll wait.
Click to expand...

The Packers had a top 10 defense the year they won the Super Bowl-was that all Dom Capers?

This not giving Gruden credit for what he did in Tampa because of Monte Kiffin has gotten to be absurd. First of all, he wasn't stubborn enough to break up the defensive coaching staff-seemingly a small thing, but not for these egomaniacs. Does Mike Tomlin not get credit in Pittsburgh since he kept LeBau? Does Bill Walsh not get credit for his titles in SF because of George Seifert (those defenses were great)? How about Ditka in Chicago with Buddy Ryan, or Gibbs in Washington with Richie Pettibon? Parcells in NY with Belichick? See a pattern here? Most teams that win a SB in the NFL do so because of a good offenses, and a great defense.
 
Last edited:
#80
#80
kohlrums said:
The Packers had a top 10 defense the year they won the Super Bowl-was that all Dom Capers?

This how not giving Gruden credit for what he did in Tampa because of Monte Kiffin has gotten to be absurd. First of all, he wasn't stubborn enough to break up the defensive coaching staff-seemingly a small thing, but not for these egomaniacs. Does Mike Tomlin not get credit in Pittsburgh since he kept LeBau? Does Bill Walsh not get credit for his titles in SF because of George Seifert (those defenses were great)? How about Ditka in Chicago with Buddy Ryan, or Gibbs in Washington with Richie Pettibon? Parcells in NY with Belichick? See a pattern here? Most teams that win a SB in the NFL do so because of a good offenses, and a great defense.
Click to expand...

Love it!!!
 
#81
#81
DeusExMachina said:
LOL, ya need to follow your own advice. Do yourself and all the other Grubageites a favor. It's not difficult, I promise. Go look up how many years from 2002-2008 where Monte Kiffin (the DC in Tampa for Gruden's tenure) had a top-10 defense. Go ahead, I'll wait. I think you'll also notice that the offense (Gruden's side of the house) was pretty bad, bordering on putrid.

Go ahead, I'll wait.
Click to expand...

You don't have to wait long. The other problem is people don't want to hear facts. Just avoid them and divert your discussion to something. I didn't spend the time to discuss Tampa because your quote was it was the "SEC of the NFL." Somehow as you think it was lucky Gruden did have a record above .500. I don't have time to make such asinine arguments. Regardless of how good the defense was, Gruden won a SB with Brad Johnson at QB. I don't know who made personnel decisions there but the was behind most other teams because of his QB talent. Now I am not saying that he would light the SEC on fire- not my point at all. But to say that he wasn't at least a good NFL coach is not reality. A coach has to manage his whole team, and Gruden has won at THE highest level in football.
 
#82
#82
VolGee4 said:
You don't have to wait long. The other problem is people don't want to hear facts. Just avoid them and divert your discussion to something. I didn't spend the time to discuss Tampa because your quote was it was the "SEC of the NFL." Somehow as you think it was lucky Gruden did have a record above .500. I don't have time to make such asinine arguments. Regardless of how good the defense was, Gruden won a SB with Brad Johnson at QB. I don't know who made personnel decisions there but the was behind most other teams because of his QB talent. Now I am not saying that he would light the SEC on fire- not my point at all. But to say that he wasn't at least a good NFL coach is not reality. A coach has to manage his whole team, and Gruden has won at THE highest level in football.
Click to expand...

Don't be afraid-you can say this.
 
#84
#84
Heh. It's stunning how bad some of you are at math.

Of course the average winning percentage in the NFL is .500. Mathematically, it has to be.

To simplify - think about one game. After the game, one coach is 1-0, the other is 0-1. Their combined record is 1-1, and their average winning percentage is .500. After two games, the combined record is 2-2, after 10,000,000 games, it's 10,000,000-10,000,000. But the average winning percentage is and always will be .500.

But thanks for continuing to buy lottery tickets.
 
#85
#85
duuuuuuuuuuuuude said:
Heh. It's stunning how bad some of you are at math.

Of course the average winning percentage in the NFL is .500. Mathematically, it has to be.

To simplify - think about one game. After the game, one coach is 1-0, the other is 0-1. Their combined record is 1-1, and their average winning percentage is .500. After two games, the combined record is 2-2, after 10,000,000 games, it's 10,000,000-10,000,000. But the average winning percentage is and always will be .500.

But thanks for continuing to buy lottery tickets.
Click to expand...

Has MIT phoned you to teach Statistics yet?
 
#87
#87
duuuuuuuuuuuuude said:
Heh. It's stunning how bad some of you are at math.

Of course the average winning percentage in the NFL is .500. Mathematically, it has to be.

To simplify - think about one game. After the game, one coach is 1-0, the other is 0-1. Their combined record is 1-1, and their average winning percentage is .500. After two games, the combined record is 2-2, after 10,000,000 games, it's 10,000,000-10,000,000. But the average winning percentage is and always will be .500.

But thanks for continuing to buy lottery tickets.
Click to expand...

Huh? Yes, the average winning percentage of EVERY single coach in the NFL is .500. But, I don't think they were comparing every coach. They were comparing the big names who people throw around- Parcells, Coughlin, Fisher, Lovie Smith, etc. Those won't automatically be .500 amonth the hundreds of coaches. I don't think you have to have math skils to logically see this.
 
#88
#88
I think we can all agree Dooley is not the right fit for TN, but we'll have a junior and senior laden team next year, and to go through another defensive coordinator, for some players it will be their 3rd one in 3 years, and another offensive coordinator, with a senior QB and a senior offensive line. We can expect our offense to have problems with Gruden's complex offense
 
#90
#90
The problem is that....there will be no problem.

And don't dare take Gruden's name in vain. He will be like a mythical greek god once he signs a contract to be the next head coach at UT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#91
#91
Clockwork Orange said:
I think we can all agree Dooley is not the right fit for TN, but we'll have a junior and senior laden team next year, and to go through another defensive coordinator, for some players it will be their 3rd one in 3 years, and another offensive coordinator, with a senior QB and a senior offensive line. We can expect our offense to have problems with Gruden's complex offense
Click to expand...


Maybe his offense is complex but he will be able to get them focused because he knows what it takes to get to the next level. But as great as it would be to take advantage of our talent in 2013, Gruden is a hire for the long haul. Our program is not where it needs to be, and I am sure we all agree that it won't change overnight. Dooley started a rebound with talent and the next guy will need some time to get it going. Please be patient.
 
#93
#93
AJeray4TN said:
So, except mediocrity because a change will be tough? No spanks.
Click to expand...

No one wants mediocrity long-term, but a progression from absolute sh__ to mediocrity to good to great makes sense.

We have been 6-7 and 5-7. We could still finish 8-5 or even 9-4 if the ball bounces our way this Saturday. That would be a huge step up from last year and our best season since 2007. Then with luck, we get all our players back and compete for the SEC East next year.

Dooley hasn't done a whole lot to build confidence, but the offense is light years better this year, especially the run game. Given another year to get the D back on track, and additional improvement in the offense (4/5 OL, all the RBs, and maybe CP and Hunter all coming back) we could show a tremendous amount of improvement next year.
 
#99
#99
VolGee4 said:
Maybe his offense is complex but he will be able to get them focused because he knows what it takes to get to the next level. But as great as it would be to take advantage of our talent in 2013, Gruden is a hire for the long haul. Our program is not where it needs to be, and I am sure we all agree that it won't change overnight. Dooley started a rebound with talent and the next guy will need some time to get it going. Please be patient.
Click to expand...

Oh thats rich,a negavol wanting patience.
 
#100
#100
vollygirl said:
Dude please quit thinking you're qualified to label every poster. Its getting old.
Click to expand...

When have I done that besides with you? You are reinventing history again like you did in that thread you started.

You have absolutely labeled yourself over the last few months. Might as well own it.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top