Behind the Power Curve - NFL Scheduling variations

[adam]

From 2011-2020, there are only 2 NFL teams that are in the top 5 in the league in the following schedule categories:

1. Games with less rest than opponents (NYG - 2nd (39), CHI - 5th (31))
2. # of short week road games (NYG - T/1st (16), CHI - T/4th (14))
3. # of games off road SNF or MNF (NYG - 2nd (20), CHI - T/4th (17))

Overall with all the other factors, the Bears had the 27th worst scheduling variables over the past decade and one of the biggest disparities between division opponents (27th > GB 13th, Vikings 12th, Lions 4th). Seattle (30th) to LAR (14th) was the biggest.  

https://www.nbcsports.com/edge/article/offseason-research/teams-most-impacted-scheduling-inequalities

I always had a feeling the Bears had it bad, but this really depicts it pretty well. For how bad the team was for a good portion of the decade, you would think some of these numbers wouldn't be so high. I remember the 3 games in 11 days thing a few years ago, and I believe this analysis doesn't take into account return from international travel (which a team loses a day on two on). 

Thoughts?

[BearFan PHX]

we used to complain that we didnt get enough national games.

I think that if your team gets used to playhing big opponents on big stages, it gives you an advantage if you are able to capitalize on it.

I dont mind the Bears playing tough teams, and national games, I just want them to ascend tot he level of the challenge. Then, in playoffs, wed have a tougher team

[jason]

1 hour ago, BearFan NYC said:

we used to complain that we didnt get enough national games.

I think that if your team gets used to playhing big opponents on big stages, it gives you an advantage if you are able to capitalize on it.

I dont mind the Bears playing tough teams, and national games, I just want them to ascend tot he level of the challenge. Then, in playoffs, wed have a tougher team

I never complained about that. The Bears usually get embarrassed on MNF, and most televised games vs the packers end in heartbreak. I'd rather not see the team on national television until it's late in the season and flex scheduling forces the Bears into a highlight game because of their record.

[BearFan PHX]

1 hour ago, jason said:

I never complained about that. The Bears usually get embarrassed on MNF, and most televised games vs the packers end in heartbreak. I'd rather not see the team on national television until it's late in the season and flex scheduling forces the Bears into a highlight game because of their record.

I want my team to be winners. If they dont win Im not looking at outside reasons. Im looking inward, to change things until we are winners.

I dont want to win the super bowl because the other team fumbled 10 times, I want to beat the crap out of them and impose our will on them. If we cant do that, then we need to keep making changes until we can.

[jason]

On 5/11/2021 at 4:37 PM, BearFan NYC said:

I want my team to be winners. If they dont win Im not looking at outside reasons. Im looking inward, to change things until we are winners.

I dont want to win the super bowl because the other team fumbled 10 times, I want to beat the crap out of them and impose our will on them. If we cant do that, then we need to keep making changes until we can.

You misunderstand. I, too, want them to earn it and win. Which is kind of what I'm saying about the primetime games. I don't want the to get those games by default, because they usually suck in those games. I want the NFL to be forced to include the Bears because the Bears are so obviously worthy. 

[BearFan PHX]

28 minutes ago, jason said:

You misunderstand. I, too, want them to earn it and win. Which is kind of what I'm saying about the primetime games. I don't want the to get those games by default, because they usually suck in those games. I want the NFL to be forced to include the Bears because the Bears are so obviously worthy. 

yes we agree.

What I was saying is that I like the tough schedule. Builds the team up for the playoffs.

[Pixote]

If your team cannot beat the top teams in regular season matchups, they don't deserve to be in the playoffs. 

 

[BearFan PHX]

34 minutes ago, Pixote said:

If your team cannot beat the top teams in regular season matchups, they don't deserve to be in the playoffs. 

 

exactly. and if all you play are creampuffs, yes it increases your chance of making the playoffs, but all but ensures you will lose because you havent been tested and hardened by tough competition.

[Mongo3451]

11 hours ago, BearFan NYC said:

exactly. and if all you play are creampuffs, yes it increases your chance of making the playoffs, but all but ensures you will lose because you havent been tested and hardened by tough competition.

I like it. 

No participation trophies!?

[BearFan PHX]

3 hours ago, Mongo3451 said:

I like it. 

No participation trophies!?

right. I dont want to see us be a top 7 team that gets some breaks. i want a team that dominates. A team people fear. I need another hit of 1985 LOL

[Mongo3451]

5 hours ago, BearFan NYC said:

right. I dont want to see us be a top 7 team that gets some breaks. i want a team that dominates. A team people fear. I need another hit of 1985 LOL

If we are the 7th team in, I want it to be hard earned with solid wins and some heartbreaking losses that make us say, "we should have a better seed than this"...

 

[BearFan PHX]

sure, and I know you dont go from where weve been right to dominance, but that is the ultimate goal. Id like to see the Bears be dominant once again. not just good, but scary.

 

[BearFan2000]

The schedule is one of the things outside our control.  I’d rather us be challenged in season to prepare us for post season.  Too easy of a schedule and can prop up a teams record. We’ve been there feeling good about our record that was somewhat hollow and it showed in the post season.  You take it one week at a time and focus on beating the team in front of you each week.  I would rather enter the post season knowing we fought and earned our spot.  Unlike last year when we lucked in because they added a 7th spot in each conference. And needed someone to lose to get us in because we couldn’t take care of business. 

[BearFan PHX]

2 hours ago, BearFan2000 said:

The schedule is one of the things outside our control.  I’d rather us be challenged in season to prepare us for post season.  Too easy of a schedule and can prop up a teams record. We’ve been there feeling good about our record that was somewhat hollow and it showed in the post season.  You take it one week at a time and focus on beating the team in front of you each week.  I would rather enter the post season knowing we fought and earned our spot.  Unlike last year when we lucked in because they added a 7th spot in each conference. And needed someone to lose to get us in because we couldn’t take care of business. 

exactly

[Pixote]

I must admit I would have loved to have a much easier game in week one. The reason being I want Fields to start week one. With a tough game to start the season, I think it will keep him holding a clipboard. I doubt Nagy will throw him into such a tough matchup to start his career.

[BearFan PHX]

I agree. I think Fields will start week 4. Unless of course he destroys the preseason and you cant hold him back.

[adam]

5 minutes ago, Pixote said:

I must admit I would have loved to have a much easier game in week one. The reason being I want Fields to start week one. With a tough game to start the season, I think it will keep him holding a clipboard. I doubt Nagy will throw him into such a tough matchup to start his career.

The Rams have a new QB (Stafford) who will be in an entirely new system for the first time in his career. The Rams also have a new Defensive Coordinator, so it seems like the only place they can go as a defense is down. I expect a close game, and I would not doubt if Fields starts (if he is ready). From all reports, Fields is a quick learner and motivated to be the best. We are not going to be stuck on 102 like Trubisky for 4 years. 

No one really knows how Stafford will play that early in the season on a new team. Trades like his are super rare, I don't think there has been a QB of his caliber traded this late in his career from his original team since Joe Montana. Here are the 5 most recent QBs I could find that went to a new team after 6+ years with their original team, and how they fared in their first game in the new uniform: 

Tannehill  (6 yrs) - Game 6 - 2019 - @ DEN, 13-16, 144 yds, 0 TD, 1 INT, 78.1 Rating (did not start)

Palmer (7 yrs) - Game 7 - 2011 - vs KC, 8-21, 116 yds, 0 TD, 3 INT, 17.3 Rating (did not start)

Culpepper (7 yrs) - Game 1 - 2006 @ PIT, 18-37, 262 yds, 0 TD, 2 INT, 49.6 Rating

Bledsoe (9 yrs) - Game 1 - 2002 vs Jets, 26-39, 271 yds, 1 TD, 2 INT, 73.8 Rating

Moon (10 yrs) - Game 1 - 1994 @GB, 20-37, 166 yds, 0 TD, 3 INT, 32.0 Rating

I have no clue if this correlates to anything, but it is pretty notable that they combined for 1 TD and 11 INT in less than 5 full games appearing for the first time with their new teams. Will Stafford be that bad? Probably not, but in September, Week 1, he was outplayed by Trubisky, ended up with 1 TD, 1 INT, and a 77.2 QB Rating with a loss. 

In his career against the Bears, he was 11-9 with 32 TD and 23 INT and an 86.3 Passer Rating. In 12 seasons, he only faced a Bears team that ended the season with a winning record 3 times and was throwing to Megatron for 7 of those seasons.  He is going from Golladay, Jones, Hockenson, Amendola, Swift, and Peterson to Kupp, Woods, Higbee, Jackson, Akers and Henderson. So there is not some massive skill position bump, LAR has a slight edge in WR depth and RB but Hockenson is definitely better than Higbee. 

 

[adam]

16 minutes ago, BearFan NYC said:

I agree. I think Fields will start week 4. Unless of course he destroys the preseason and you cant hold him back.

The Bears are still sort of in a win-now mode (with the aging defense), and in a weird way, I think Fields gives them the best chance to win with his ability to get out of the pocket. Dalton is not very mobile and took 24 sacks and ended up 19th in sacks in only 9 starts with the vaunted Dallas O-Line. Trubisky was sacked 18 times in 9 starts with the Bears O-Line. Fields has much better pocket awareness than Trubisky and way better mobility than Dalton. That makes me believe Fields will be in sooner than later. The latest for me was Week 2 at home against the Bengals, but I have a feeling he will be named the Week 1 starter after the 2nd preseason game.

[Bill]

I see a lot of similarities to the rams D this year to the bears after 2018

[BearFan2000]

While it's a new system for Stafford after such a long time in Detroit, his time there hasn't exactly been stable coaching staff wise, so he's more used to change than you might think.  Also it's hard to argue that his supporting cast in LA will be an improvement from what he's had in Detroit.   I wouldn't count Stafford out.  I do agree that their D could take a step back but still lots of talent on that side of the ball.  It will be a tough week 1 matchup on the road.  

[adam]

On 6/1/2021 at 7:49 AM, BearFan2000 said:

While it's a new system for Stafford after such a long time in Detroit, his time there hasn't exactly been stable coaching staff wise, so he's more used to change than you might think.  Also it's hard to argue that his supporting cast in LA will be an improvement from what he's had in Detroit.   I wouldn't count Stafford out.  I do agree that their D could take a step back but still lots of talent on that side of the ball.  It will be a tough week 1 matchup on the road.  

It's gonna be a tough game for sure, but it won't be a blowout. I like how we match up against the Rams. We have better RBs, Rams have a slight edge at WR depth and TE is pretty even. QB will come down to whether we start Fields or Dalton. On defense, with Goldman back, the DLine is close to even, we have better Edge with Mack, Rams have better CBs, but the Bears have better ILBs and Safeties. Both of these teams are playoff teams, so this will be a good test to see where each other are at.

[lemonej]

On 5/30/2021 at 5:05 PM, adam said:

The Rams have a new QB (Stafford) who will be in an entirely new system for the first time in his career. The Rams also have a new Defensive Coordinator, so it seems like the only place they can go as a defense is down. I expect a close game, and I would not doubt if Fields starts (if he is ready). From all reports, Fields is a quick learner and motivated to be the best. We are not going to be stuck on 102 like Trubisky for 4 years. 

No one really knows how Stafford will play that early in the season on a new team. Trades like his are super rare, I don't think there has been a QB of his caliber traded this late in his career from his original team since Joe Montana. Here are the 5 most recent QBs I could find that went to a new team after 6+ years with their original team, and how they fared in their first game in the new uniform: 

Tannehill  (6 yrs) - Game 6 - 2019 - @ DEN, 13-16, 144 yds, 0 TD, 1 INT, 78.1 Rating (did not start)

Palmer (7 yrs) - Game 7 - 2011 - vs KC, 8-21, 116 yds, 0 TD, 3 INT, 17.3 Rating (did not start)

Culpepper (7 yrs) - Game 1 - 2006 @ PIT, 18-37, 262 yds, 0 TD, 2 INT, 49.6 Rating

Bledsoe (9 yrs) - Game 1 - 2002 vs Jets, 26-39, 271 yds, 1 TD, 2 INT, 73.8 Rating

Moon (10 yrs) - Game 1 - 1994 @GB, 20-37, 166 yds, 0 TD, 3 INT, 32.0 Rating

I have no clue if this correlates to anything, but it is pretty notable that they combined for 1 TD and 11 INT in less than 5 full games appearing for the first time with their new teams. Will Stafford be that bad? Probably not, but in September, Week 1, he was outplayed by Trubisky, ended up with 1 TD, 1 INT, and a 77.2 QB Rating with a loss. 

In his career against the Bears, he was 11-9 with 32 TD and 23 INT and an 86.3 Passer Rating. In 12 seasons, he only faced a Bears team that ended the season with a winning record 3 times and was throwing to Megatron for 7 of those seasons.  He is going from Golladay, Jones, Hockenson, Amendola, Swift, and Peterson to Kupp, Woods, Higbee, Jackson, Akers and Henderson. So there is not some massive skill position bump, LAR has a slight edge in WR depth and RB but Hockenson is definitely better than Higbee. 

 

Where does Brett Farve rank on the list , didn't he play 6+ with GB?

 

[adam]

So Brett Favre was drafted by ATL, then traded to GB before his run there, then trade to the Jets. So since he was not drafted by the Packers, I didn't count a player like him. 

People do not give ATL enough flak for trading Favre. The following year he threw for more yards than Chris Miller and Wade Wilson combined, who were QB1 and QB2 for ATL.