Atlfanstckndenver Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/FO-basicsChampionship teams are generally defined by their ability to dominate inferior opponents, not their ability to win close games.Football games are often decided by just one or two plays -- a missed field goal, a bouncing fumble, the subjective spot of an official on fourth-and-1. One missed assignment by a cornerback, or one slightly askew pass that bounces off a receiver's hands and into those of a defensive back five yards away and the game could be over. In a blowout, however, one lucky bounce isn't going to change things.Championship teams beat their good opponents convincingly and destroy the cupcakes on the schedule. Certainly there are exceptions to this rule, including last year's Super Bowl champion. However, in the DVOA era (1989-2014), 23 of 26 Super Bowl champions have had more blowouts against sub-.500 teams than close wins against above-.500 teams.So I was reading this article that goes over a Bundle of statistical correlations between certain aspects of team building/play and winning. The bottom of the article describes how teams who are successful in winning the majority of close games they play in doesn't exactly correlate to winning championships at all. While teams who know how to put their foot on the neck of their opponents are more likely at a shot to win a championship. I couldn't help but read this and other concepts in the article and draw parallels with the Falcons. The Mike Smith era was so full of heart pounding close games that it really did come to fruition in our case, making this statement resonate as very true. What I'll be looking for going forward is whether or not this team can simply put away teams they should beat. (Among other things of course) Smith's Falcons really did tease us in multiple ways into feeling like we where contenders, but the question has to be asked, how much of a true contender where we really? I think the 2012 team was the exception, but even that year, I believe we had numerous close games, and of course that year ended with yet another heart palpitating close game. Heck even the one single playoff game we won with Smitty at the helm was far closer than it should've been. This aspect of our team was a very fatal one. It's slow and I'm bored so sorry if this seems like random irrelevant info, but the whole "team Smith" or "team Dimitrov" debate should consider this into the equation. All of us complained about how we played down to our opponents. We all know that we can't blame Dimitrov for this either. Well perhaps the new coaching staff can fix this, and perhaps this and even this alone can cause a huge swing leading our team into being contenders and not just pretenders. Sidenote: that article had many points that you can keep in context with the Falcons over the last 8 years or so. Totally worth the read when you're bored and need a football fix. Anther good point they made which seemed obvious to me was that teams who designate a higher percentage of their salary to "stars" or starters where far less likely to succeed than the teams who built a team with solid starters across the board and with better depth. Yet another regime failure imo. (Both TD and Smitty). Enjoy your weekend guys and gals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.