I read somewhere that Cleveland has been around average for players on IR, compared to the Bears at the bottom over the last 4 years. I think your spreadsheet backs that up. And as you pointed out, Cleveland has been on an upward trend for health while the Bears have had a horrific downward trend.
Actually that chart shows Cleveland trending down - same as Chicago
They were 32 when he took over. And shot up to the mid teens.
This shows total games missed b/c of injuries is almost dead in the middle.
They were 32 when he took over. And shot up to the mid teens.
Nice job of cherry picking. Not sure why I expected otherwise, but go to the last few years, which are the most relevant. They trend down.
He will make a difference here since any change would be up from 32nd. But he may only be able to get us to below average rather than worst.
Wait, so going back to 2010 is cherry picking, but going back 3 years isn't? I'm not sure you understand what cherry picking means. Ya it slid back down recently, but the overall trend is up from when he started. 2010 to 2018 w/the Bears is a downward trend, only a downward trend.
And again, if we want to only go recent, last year they were middle of the pack in games missed.
Nice job of cherry picking. Not sure why I expected otherwise, but go to the last few years, which are the most relevant. They trend down.
He will make a difference here since any change would be up from 32nd. But he may only be able to get us to below average rather than worst.
Wait, so going back to 2010 is cherry picking, but going back 3 years isn't? I'm not sure you understand what cherry picking means. And again, if we want to only go recent, last year they were middle of the pack in games missed.
okay... This is always like pulling teeth..... We'll do it your way.
They went from 32 to 22 to 27 to 5 to 14 to 21 to 23.
Other than the 5 and 14, that is not very good. In that same period, Chicago was at 2 once, at 3 once, and at 14 twice. But they are not relevant. What is relevant is the last periods and the trend. The last periods were not impressive and they were trending down. And I'm going to end this one as I usually end our discussions. We disagree and interpret the data differently. So be it. I'm not going there any more. I've looked at the data provided and am confident I've analyzed it and that it supports my position. Until new data shows up to change that, I'm comfortable with the conclusions. You can take whatever position you'd like.
Anyone noticing a trend here, other then cle/chicago? w/these 2 charts I showed(realized it as I was looking for them). The majority of teams making the playoffs are on the left side of both charts.
BiH what are we doin here? If you were to do a chart and graph the chart from the time he started(2010-2018) would the line go up or down? If you were to do the same thing for the Bears in that same timeframe would it go up or down? No team is going to have a consistently healthy team, none, other teams are all over those charts also, NE, GB range anywhere from the bottom to the top 1/2 also.
Anyone noticing a trend here, other then cle/chicago? w/these 2 charts I showed(realized it as I was looking for them). The majority of teams making the playoffs are on the left side of both charts.
BiH what are we doin here? If you were to do a chart and graph the chart from the time he started(2010-2018) would the line go up or down? If you were to do the same thing for the Bears in that same timeframe would it go up or down? No team is going to have a consistently healthy team, none, other teams are all over those charts also, NE, GB range anywhere from the bottom to the top 1/2 also.
You don't think it's potentially significant, though, that CLE had been steadily declining between 2013-2016? I know it doesn't cover Tucker's entire tenure with the Browns, and the overall trend may be upward, but his last four years (minus 2017 of course) has been going down steadily, not "all over the charts".
Anyone noticing a trend here, other then cle/chicago? w/these 2 charts I showed(realized it as I was looking for them). The majority of teams making the playoffs are on the left side of both charts.
BiH what are we doin here? If you were to do a chart and graph the chart from the time he started(2010-2018) would the line go up or down? If you were to do the same thing for the Bears in that same timeframe would it go up or down? No team is going to have a consistently healthy team, none, other teams are all over those charts also, NE, GB range anywhere from the bottom to the top 1/2 also.
You don't think it's potentially significant, though, that CLE had been steadily declining between 2013-2016? I know it doesn't cover Tucker's entire tenure with the Browns, and the overall trend may be upward, but his last four years (minus 2017 of course) has been going down steadily, not "all over the charts".
It is significant PB as I mentioned. You typically weigh the most recent periods the heaviest when you do these analysis. And you always look for trends. The two things you mentioned are the things I noticed immediately, but I do this stuff every day.
Now, getting the 2017 data will be very interesting. The other thing of note that I do not have answers to is were there any extenuating circumstances -- for instance our trainer was only here the last three years, so only the last three years are relevant for the Bears. I believe Tucker (I still have a hard time typing that) was there the entire time for the chart.
Rusty was obviously a real gem and it hurt to lose him. Anyway, this whole thing has devolved as usual. The only point I was trying to make initially was that Tucker while better than what we had does not seem overly impressive. Apparently that is an issue for some, but it is still what I see.
What I am waiting for is if Butkus has any input on this guy. Sometimes a really good guy can get caught up behind a guy that is just average and must follow that persons lead. In other words, This guy may be very good but since he was the assistant trainer, this data may be more reflective of his bosses capabilities. So there is really a lot of unknown here (at least for me). But what I can confidently say after looking at that data, is that it is not overly impressive. What part Tucker played in that, I am not able to say. But until I have more data/knowledge, I'm not overly impressed. But we should get better than we were. Not sure that should be our target, but I guess better is better than not better
Decided to see what sort of impact Rusty actually had. It appears Football Outsiders started their AGL stats in 2008 so that's as far back as I could go despite Rusty starting with the Bears in 2005. He retired in January 2013 so the 2012 season was his last year essentially. Not bad looking at all. Not lower than 19th during those last few years. Top 10 three times. Pretty dramatic decline after his retirement. Come back Rusty!