Don't sleep on Dallas

[steeler_fan_in_t.o.]

But it's really about the model that predicted the outcome.

If the team exceeded or didn't meet our expectations, I tend to believe that the problem is our expectations and not the team / players.

Or, to put it into the theme of the day.....

When an election does not go according to the polls, the talking heads will tell you how a candidate out-performed expectations but it is really more about how badly out-of-touch the pollsters are.

[Captain Lemming]

I agree with you; Coaching is as important as talent. When the Pats beat the Rams in the Super Bowl a couple of years ago was another example of that. Rams were the most talented team; Pats had the better coaches.

As I always say you need the "right" talent.
The Pats were more talented in the areas that count.

The team with the better QB and secondary won.
The biggest contribution BB made to that with was aquiring Gilmore years earlier.
Given an average secondary and the Rams destroy the Pats.

[Captain Lemming]

I agree with you; Coaching is as important as talent.

7-0...equal parts coaching and talent? Come on say it.

THAT would be a nice sig.

[hawaiiansteel]

7-0...equal parts coaching and talent? Come on say it.

THAT would be a nice sig.

GREAT sig!!!!!!!

[BURGH86STEEL]

I agree with you; Coaching is as important as talent. When the Pats beat the Rams in the Super Bowl a couple of years ago was another example of that. Rams were the most talented team; Pats had the better coaches.

I am not sure why people like to create this narrative the one team is simply more talented than another team? It's not really about how talented a team is or is not. It boils down to how well a team plays and executes.

The difference in that game was that Tom Brady made the plays that Goff did not. Goff missed on the opportunities he had and as a result the Rams loss the game.

[Northern_Blitz]

Or, to put it into the theme of the day.....

When an election does not go according to the polls, the talking heads will tell you how a candidate out-performed expectations but it is really more about how badly out-of-touch the pollsters are.

That though crossed my mind while writing that post.

How pollsters don't get held accountable for doing terribly is beyond me.

Seems pretty clear that there's a lot of bias that creeps into their methods.

And that would be OK if the biases were evenly distributed because we could get something that looked "true" by averaging all the polls a la Real Clear Politics or Fivethirtyeight.

But I think averaging only strengthens confirmation bias when everyone leans in the same direction.

[Northern_Blitz]

7-0...equal parts coaching and talent? Come on say it.

THAT would be a nice sig.

(it's the new Boom)

[Northern_Blitz]

(it's the new Boom)

This one's good too, but I wanted one that said "checkmate"

[NJ-STEELER]

I don’t think some hate Tomlin to the level you think they do. I sense frustration when we underperform vs expectations.

And on the flip side of last season, I think people overrated Tomlin for an 8-8 season because many expected nothing without Ben.

Tomlin’s neither as good or bad as most say. And having listened to Tomlin enough times, I tend to think he’d agree with that. I think Tomlin is pretty calm, cool, and collected. He’s a rock that consistently performs like we would expect him to. And players respond to him because he’s consistent and a player’s coach.

His success is determined by the quality of players and coaches around him. He seems to do better when surrounded by quality. I don’t see him as a play calling guru or a guy that quickly adapts. He often goes back to what he knows and tries to simplify football and much like many Steeler coaches before him, you know what to expect and he’s going to try and beat you straight up with his strengths.

A lot of times he’s a slow starter. He’s bad at clock management. He’s struggled in the playoffs. He’s struggled preparing his team for teams he should beat. His unleashing of hell is a running joke. And he’s slow to change wether it’s an ineffective Oline or DBs or punters.

But he deals well with adversity. And he gets a lot out of guys others may not.

I don’t know where he lands on talent evaluation, but I think he likes to gamble and it’s why we end up reaching more sometimes. Sometimes it works out. Other times it doesn’t.

Overall he’s sound. I think he’s one of the best leaders in the NFL. I like the guy a ton. And I totally get why some love him while he drives others nuts.

I think it’s ok to get frustrated with people you like/love. Just ask any married person. Everything is a shade of gray.

pretty good assessment

I've gotten on him for some of the things you stated, buy i've also defended him on others.

some can actually have an open mind and do both

[NorthCoast]

Or, to put it into the theme of the day.....

When an election does not go according to the polls, the talking heads will tell you how a candidate out-performed expectations but it is really more about how badly out-of-touch the pollsters are.

I read a funny line today about the election and polling; "polling has lost its useful in the same manner as phrenology"..... (I had to look up phrenology to get the analogy)

[Captain Lemming]

I am not sure why people like to create this narrative the one team is simply more talented than another team? It's not really about how talented a team is or is not. It boils down to how well a team plays and executes.

The difference in that game was that Tom Brady made the plays that Goff did not. Goff missed on the opportunities he had and as a result the Rams loss the game.

Better QB MAKES plays.
Better secondary PREVENTS QB from making plays.

[Captain Lemming]

Or, to put it into the theme of the day.....

When an election does not go according to the polls, the talking heads will tell you how a candidate out-performed expectations but it is really more about how badly out-of-touch the pollsters are.

No a "pollster" looks at "polls". I would suggest that people who don't trust government are more wary of being polled. If a percentage of people (say 5 percent) refuse the offer to be polled, a pollsters numbers are massively skewed.

Any idea of bias in polling is silly. If a pollster favors one side he is best served to show his side as being behind, so as to incentivize his side to turn out. Faulty polling leads to complacency on the side that appears to have a lead.

[NorthCoast]

I am not sure why people like to create this narrative the one team is simply more talented than another team? It's not really about how talented a team is or is not. It boils down to how well a team plays and executes.

The difference in that game was that Tom Brady made the plays that Goff did not. Goff missed on the opportunities he had and as a result the Rams loss the game.

I can agree all teams have talent. But we've heard it often enough from players, coaches, and talking heads what separates the great players from the talented players is consistency. The Aaron Donalds, TJ Watts, Aaron Rodgers, Tom Bradys are far and away more consistent than their peers. To some degree it is coachable but it seems there is an innate mindset that they want and can win on every play not just a few splash plays here and there. We can all hate AB for what he became, but he was the ultimate in consistency and a great WR.

[NorthCoast]

No a "pollster" looks at "polls". I would suggest that people who don't trust government are more wary of being polled. If a percentage of people (say 5 percent) refuse the offer to be polled, a pollsters numbers are massively skewed.

Any idea of bias in polling is silly. If a pollster favors one side he is best served to show his side as being behind, so as to incentivize his side to turn out. Faulty polling leads to complacency on the side that appears to have a lead.

Yea, the polling companies are now blaming the pollees for their failures.... what a joke. Their methods clearly are outdated. Random phone calls to random people doesn't work.

[steeler_fan_in_t.o.]

No a "pollster" looks at "polls". I would suggest that people who don't trust government are more wary of being polled. If a percentage of people (say 5 percent) refuse the offer to be polled, a pollsters numbers are massively skewed.

Any idea of bias in polling is silly. If a pollster favors one side he is best served to show his side as being behind, so as to incentivize his side to turn out. Faulty polling leads to complacency on the side that appears to have a lead.

That simply becomes another factor for a pollster to build in to the model. I don't know how they have to account for it, but I do know that after how off they have been since 2016, the answer is not to simply report then numbers they receive.