Games that the "better" team did not win. Vol.Playoff & Championship Games/Series

Originally Posted by THE GR8

its simple statistics just like every aspect of life...

when you increase the sample size you will get closer to the overall result.

for example if you flip a coin (equal probability) 1 time and it lands heads this does not mean that you will get heads 100% of the time, just as if you flip the coin 4 times and get 3 heads does not mean heads will occur 75% as it does given the sample size of 4. When you flip this coin more and more times and increase your sample size you will get closer and closer to 50% heads and 50% tails as it should be.

In sports this means that if your sample size is 1 (a la NFL playoffs/NCAA tourny) you are most likely to get an end result that is not an accurate depiction of whose the better team. For if one team will usually win 75% of the time and are therefore the better team, they can still lose in this 1 game 25% of the time, which even if they lose would not give an accurate result of which team is better

In a 7 game series (NBA, MLB, etc) you are more likely to get the accurate result, and the team that wins 75% of the time is more likely to win the majority of the games in a 7 game series than just one single game but this still cannot be completely accurate because the team that wins 25% of the time still has a (very slim) chance of winning 4 of the 7 games. However because of this there are probably FAR more examples of the "better" team losing in an NFL playoff game or NCAA tourny than a 7 game NBA series, but it is still possible in either scenarios.

The only way the better team would ALWAYS come out on top (statistically) would be in a 50 game series or some ++%* with an enormous sample size where the better team (the team that has the higher probability to win) will win the majority almost 100% of the time.

I would say in a 7 game series the "better" team should win 90% or so of the time, depending how much better they are... however that is the beauty of playoff time, it doesnt necessarily matter who the better team is, just the team that can win that 1 game or that 7 game series. And if the teams are pretty close in comparison an upset can be very likely given the small sample space, or number of games, and it is still possible even if one team is significantly better than the other especially in a one game scenario such as NCAA tournament.

It also matters if the team that is "inferior" can step up and win playoff games more than better teams, or if one team has a better game plan, but i consider both to be skills themselves imo... and of course refs can often be a factor like the Heat in 06 and Lakers in 02 as well as other incidents...
Pretty much.
 
Originally Posted by itsaboutthattime

Originally Posted by Statis22

- no big talent difference from either team.

- That Buckeye defense was legit and I had no reason to believe that if they played a week later that they couldn't do that again.

- It was how they won games all season.
no question the buckeye defense was legit, but do you remember that hurricanes roster? and did you watch the video i posted?

[h3]Offense[/h3][h3] Defense[/h3]


And Ohio State put more than a few guys off that team into the pros themselves. So again if the talent gap isn't that wide, then what can you take from that game to make you believe that Ohio State couldn't win that game in the same fashion had they played again?
 
Originally Posted by itsaboutthattime

Originally Posted by Statis22

- no big talent difference from either team.

- That Buckeye defense was legit and I had no reason to believe that if they played a week later that they couldn't do that again.

- It was how they won games all season.
no question the buckeye defense was legit, but do you remember that hurricanes roster? and did you watch the video i posted?

[h3]Offense[/h3][h3] Defense[/h3]


And Ohio State put more than a few guys off that team into the pros themselves. So again if the talent gap isn't that wide, then what can you take from that game to make you believe that Ohio State couldn't win that game in the same fashion had they played again?
 
Originally Posted by Statis22


And Ohio State put more than a few guys off that team into the pros themselves. So again if the talent gap isn't that wide, then what can you take from that game to make you believe that Ohio State couldn't win that game in the same fashion had they played again?

sure they put guys into the pros, but check how many guys from miami's squad were put in PRO BOWLS
(I assume this is a sufficient standard to distinguish the better NFL players from the average joe or someone who is barely holding onto a roster spot.. from OSU's roster Will Smith was the only starter who ever made a Pro Bowl, which he did once.. nick mangold has made it twice, but he was the backup center)


and they won the game on a BS call (so i'll ask again, did you watch the video i posted?)


and you can see ohio state's depth chart for that year here (scroll down):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Ohio_State_Buckeyes_football_team
   

  
 
Originally Posted by Statis22


And Ohio State put more than a few guys off that team into the pros themselves. So again if the talent gap isn't that wide, then what can you take from that game to make you believe that Ohio State couldn't win that game in the same fashion had they played again?

sure they put guys into the pros, but check how many guys from miami's squad were put in PRO BOWLS
(I assume this is a sufficient standard to distinguish the better NFL players from the average joe or someone who is barely holding onto a roster spot.. from OSU's roster Will Smith was the only starter who ever made a Pro Bowl, which he did once.. nick mangold has made it twice, but he was the backup center)


and they won the game on a BS call (so i'll ask again, did you watch the video i posted?)


and you can see ohio state's depth chart for that year here (scroll down):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Ohio_State_Buckeyes_football_team
   

  
 
Back
Top Bottom