Buffalo Bills 2014

[Randall Flagg]

 

 

I wonder what Freddy thought watching him slide here.

[nfreeman]

Anyone still beating the "refs are out to get us and are the reason we keep losing" drum should read Jerry Sullivan's column today: http://www.buffalonews.com/columns/jerry-sullivan/forget-the-officiating-the-bills-simply-choked-20141208

 

 

I know it’s reassuring to blame the officiating for every crushing Buffalo defeat. It’s become part of the local rooting culture, like painting your face and apologizing for Doug Whaley. To some fans, the entire 15-year run of dysfunction is a sinister NFL conspiracy to screw the Bills.

 

Get a grip, people. Sure, the guys in stripes didn’t have their best day. It was a rookie crew, which usually guarantees some head-scratching calls. But are fans so deluded that they would believe the officials would celebrate one team’s score in clear view of the public?

 

But instead of dwelling on the officials, you should be directing your ire where it really belongs – at the team, coaches and management.

 

Bad teams don’t tend to get a lot of calls. Officials have come to expect the Bills to do stupid things. It comes with the territory.

They had mainly themselves to blame. They had 11 penalties, which tied St. Louis for the most in the league Sunday. The Rams managed to win, 24-0. Some of the best teams in the NFL get a lot of flags. They overcome it and limit the whining.

 

How about playing with a little poise and control in the biggest game in 10 years? How about the Bills not jumping offsides or holding on interception returns. How about Jerry Hughes not getting in the officials’ face and being flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct – his third such call of the year?

[LastPommerFan]

Anyone still beating the "refs are out to get us and are the reason we keep losing" drum should read Jerry Sullivan's column today: http://www.buffalone...choked-20141208

 

Sully is solid reference to back up your position. He is in no way an arrogant contrarian douche with minimal at best writing talent.

 

 

sorry...

 

Let me rephrase without so much sarcasm.

 

While your position is, in my opinion, correct, Sully is a terrible reference to back up your position. He is an arrogant contrarian douche with minimal at best writing talent.

[qwksndmonster]

Freeman, would you agree that there's a problem with NFL officiating in general?

 

Very few are beating the "refs are out to get us and are the reason we keep losing" drum. Many are beating the "refs are obviously biased towards the good teams" drum.

 

It's certainly not drawing much ire away from the team, coaches, or management from what I can tell.

Edited December 9, 2014 by qwksndmonster

[Eleven]

Freeman, would you agree that there's a problem with NFL officiating in general?

 

Very few are beating the "refs are out to get us and are the reason we keep losing" drum. Many are beating the "refs are obviously biased towards the good teams" drum.

 

It's certainly not drawing much ire from the team, coaches, or management from what I can tell.

A lot of players were upset Sunday.

 

I'm with you on the refs are biased towards the good teams thing. I miss the times when that benefited the Bills.

[Lanny]

Freeman, would you agree that there's a problem with NFL officiating in general?

 

Very few are beating the "refs are out to get us and are the reason we keep losing" drum. Many are beating the "refs are obviously biased towards the good teams" drum.

 

It's certainly not drawing much ire from the team, coaches, or management from what I can tell.

 

http://www.nflpenalties.com/

 

Seattle, Denver and New England are top 4 in penalties against.

[darksabre]

[/background][/color][/font]

 

http://www.nflpenalties.com/

 

Seattle, Denver and New England are top 4 in penalties against.

 

Without situational context those numbers are kind of meaningless.

[TrueBlueGED]

I really don't think overall penalties against tells us if there is a "good team bias" or not. The important question to me is whether or not there's a "good team bias" on 50/50 calls in crucial situations. I don't know of anything that has attempted to look at it this way. We do, however, know that there is a home team bias...but that doesn't appear to be related to the quality of the home team.

[shrader]

I really don't think overall penalties against tells us if there is a "good team bias" or not. The important question to me is whether or not there's a "good team bias" on 50/50 calls in crucial situations. I don't know of anything that has attempted to look at it this way. We do, however, know that there is a home team bias...but that doesn't appear to be related to the quality of the home team.

 

And not just crucial situations, but the focus needs to be on subjective calls. The second most common call in the league is a false start. There are rare occasions like the KC game, but for the most part, a false start is about as objective as it gets. Bias will have no impact on those calls, so right off the bat, there's ~17% of all penalties that are meaningless here. Then there's other calls like 12 men on the field or delay of game which are out the window too.

 

On a side note, Cleveland was called for defensive delay of game earlier this year. I'd love to know what happened there.

 

 

edit: I'd also be curious to see what the call differential was in games. It's all in that site, but you would have to do it by hand. Seattle is #1, but how many calls are going against their opponents in each game?

Edited December 9, 2014 by shrader

[nfreeman]

Freeman, would you agree that there's a problem with NFL officiating in general?

 

Very few are beating the "refs are out to get us and are the reason we keep losing" drum. Many are beating the "refs are obviously biased towards the good teams" drum.

 

It's certainly not drawing much ire away from the team, coaches, or management from what I can tell.

 

I don't think there is a particular problem with NFL officiating -- at least not in the sense of being materially different from NFL officiating in the past or from any other sport's officiating.

 

And I do think there are some posters here that really believe that the refs are biased against the Bills and that this bias has resulted in the Bills losing games.

 

And I think that that belief is immature and clueless.

 

[/background][/color][/font]

 

http://www.nflpenalties.com/

 

Seattle, Denver and New England are top 4 in penalties against.

 

Boom!

 

I really don't think overall penalties against tells us if there is a "good team bias" or not. The important question to me is whether or not there's a "good team bias" on 50/50 calls in crucial situations. I don't know of anything that has attempted to look at it this way. We do, however, know that there is a home team bias...but that doesn't appear to be related to the quality of the home team.

 

While I agree that 50/50 calls in crucial situations would be the ideal metric, I don't see how you can disregard overall penalties.

[TrueBlueGED]

While I agree that 50/50 calls in crucial situations would be the ideal metric, I don't see how you can disregard overall penalties.

 

Because of what Shrader posted. So many penalties are not subjective, that including everything really muddies the waters. At the very least I think it would have to be narrowed down to 50/50 penalties, and see if they tilt towards the good teams or not. A good team might have more overall penalties, but 70% of them are objective calls; the remaining 30% are subjective calls, and 65% of those they're coming out on top. Did I explain that in a way that makes sense?

[LastPommerFan]

While I agree that 50/50 calls in crucial situations would be the ideal metric, I don't see how you can disregard overall penalties.

 

Because it's not about the first down in the first quarter holding calls. I'd like to see penalties in the red zone, resulting in a first down, and penalties that occur on a 3rd/4th down.

 

Just glancing quickly at Denver's penalties, looks like an awful lot of penalties on first down, which makes sense, because that's when Payton takes the risks that might lead to holding, but in the end doesn't have a huge effect on the game as say a penalty on a successful 3rd down conversion.

[Claude_Verret]

Agree that there isn't an anti-Bills conspiracy, but I'm very skeptical about the unintentional bias against long time doormat franchises like the Bills when it comes to the subjective calls.

 

For example, is there any universe one could imagine where a flag is NOT thrown against the Bills in this ultimate of crucial situations? Not a chance in hell.

 

http://www.canalstre...-junior-galette

[nfreeman]

Because of what Shrader posted. So many penalties are not subjective, that including everything really muddies the waters. At the very least I think it would have to be narrowed down to 50/50 penalties, and see if they tilt towards the good teams or not. A good team might have more overall penalties, but 70% of them are objective calls; the remaining 30% are subjective calls, and 65% of those they're coming out on top. Did I explain that in a way that makes sense?

 

A good team might be in the top 4 in the NFL in penalties, with 70% of them being bonehead plays like false starts, delay of game and 12 men on the field? That doesn't seem likely.

 

And who is going to decide whether a penalty is "50/50?"

 

Now that Pandora's box has been opened (heh), I suppose I should note that our magical advanced ref stats should also include non-penalty calls like fumble/not a fumble, in bounds/out of bounds, first down achieved/not achieved, etc.

[Claude_Verret]

I guess this goes here.

 

Cam Newton in car wreck

[Eleven]

A good team might be in the top 4 in the NFL in penalties, with 70% of them being bonehead plays like false starts, delay of game and 12 men on the field? That doesn't seem likely.

 

And who is going to decide whether a penalty is "50/50?"

 

Now that Pandora's box has been opened (heh), I suppose I should note that our magical advanced ref stats should also include non-penalty calls like fumble/not a fumble, in bounds/out of bounds, first down achieved/not achieved, etc.

 

I think we all know that a pass interference call on 3d and 20 is a little different than a holding call on first down.

[TrueBlueGED]

A good team might be in the top 4 in the NFL in penalties, with 70% of them being bonehead plays like false starts, delay of game and 12 men on the field? That doesn't seem likely.

 

And who is going to decide whether a penalty is "50/50?"

 

Now that Pandora's box has been opened (heh), I suppose I should note that our magical advanced ref stats should also include non-penalty calls like fumble/not a fumble, in bounds/out of bounds, first down achieved/not achieved, etc.

 

You'd also think that good teams wouldn't have coaches that bungle game management as badly as Marrone does, yet they do (seriously, have you ever paid attention to Andy Reid's clock management?). The players are just good enough that it doesn't regularly matter. And in the grand scheme of things, a 5 yard penalty here or there is not that big of a deal.

 

50/50 is just my shorthand for things that involve a significant amount of ref subjectivity. When a receiver and a DB are handfighting 50 yards down field and the ref throws a flag, who is it on? Stuff like that.

 

I would love to see a breakdown like this!

[nfreeman]

I think we all know that a pass interference call on 3d and 20 is a little different than a holding call on first down.

 

Of course. I'm just saying that disregarding aggregate penalties is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

[Johnny DangerFace]

Of course. I'm just saying that disregarding aggregate penalties is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

 

I just want to see the baby, clean or not

[Hoss]

There's probably a decent chance that good teams have a larger number of penalties called because good teams make bigger/better plays more often. Those plays last longer and cover more of the field than a team that runs it up the gut and then throws a quick incompletion.

[TrueBlueGED]

Of course. I'm just saying that disregarding aggregate penalties is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

 

I guess I just don't fully understand how objective calls can be used to represent, or not represent, ref bias in any way. Are you trying to argue that true bias would involve refs completely ignoring objective penalties? I don't think that happens at all, which is why I don't think those types of calls are relevant here. The only bias I think exists is that on things that are heavily subjective, the good team and/or player is more likely to get the benefit of the doubt than the bad team and/or player.

 

For example, if Calvin Johnson and Leodis McKelvin both commit pass interference on a fly route, do you think the ref is equally likely to throw the flag on each player? I do not. If Peyton Manning and Kyle Orton are subject to the same questionable hit, which one do you think is more likely to draw the roughing the passer? This does not mean I think the refs ignore Ryan Clady when he flinches pre-snap.

Edited December 9, 2014 by TrueBluePhD

[SwampD]

Agree that there isn't an anti-Bills conspiracy, but I'm very skeptical about the unintentional bias against long time doormat franchises like the Bills when it comes to the subjective calls.

 

For example, is there any universe one could imagine where a flag is NOT thrown against the Bills in this ultimate of crucial situations? Not a chance in hell.

 

http://www.canalstre...-junior-galette

To quote nfreeman, "BOOM!"

 

 

I find it hilarious that if you think the refs are biased, for whatever reason, you are immature or clueless. It has already been shown in the NBA to have happened (and I'm sure it was just more than 1). It was already shown to have happened in the NHL, and even used to effect the outcomes of games. Is the NFL really above reproach in this matter? The league that itself destroyed the evidence of a known 2 time cheater and will put him in the HOF as the greatest head coach of all time? The league that is a mutli-billion dollar industry that allies itself to another multi-billion dollar industry, gambling, that pillar of morals and good doing. Yep, there is no grownup reason to question what we see.

 

 

I think we all know that a pass interference call on 3d and 20 is a little different than a holding call on first down.

 

Nope, they are all the same. :doh:

[nfreeman]

I guess I just don't fully understand how objective calls can be used to represent, or not represent, ref bias in any way. Are you trying to argue that true bias would involve refs completely ignoring objective penalties? I don't think that happens at all, which is why I don't think those types of calls are relevant here. The only bias I think exists is that on things that are heavily subjective, the good team and/or player is more likely to get the benefit of the doubt than the bad team and/or player.

 

For example, if Calvin Johnson and Leodis McKelvin both commit pass interference on a fly route, do you think the ref is equally likely to throw the flag on each player? I do not. If Peyton Manning and Kyle Orton are subject to the same questionable hit, which one do you think is more likely to draw the roughing the passer? This does not mean I think the refs ignore Ryan Clady when he flinches pre-snap.

 

I didn't say that. I said that if the only data we have include both objective and subjective calls, it is a mistake to disregard the data, even though it is imperfect.

 

To quote nfreeman, "BOOM!"

 

 

I find it hilarious that if you think the refs are biased, for whatever reason, you are immature or clueless. It has already been shown in the NBA to have happened (and I'm sure it was just more than 1). It was already shown to have happened in the NHL, and even used to effect the outcomes of games. Is the NFL really above reproach in this matter? The league that itself destroyed the evidence of a known 2 time cheater and will put him in the HOF as the greatest head coach of all time? The league that is a mutli-billion dollar industry that allies itself to another multi-billion dollar industry, gambling, that pillar of morals and good doing. Yep, there is no grownup reason to question what we see.

 

 

 

 

Nope, they are all the same. :doh:

 

Do you think Claude's hypothetical proved anything? "If this had happened in a Bills game, the Bills would've been penalized?" That's boom-worthy? If you think it is, your other theories become more understandable.

 

As for the bolded: the refs are human and probably do bring some bias to the table. As TBPhD points out, Calvin Johnson and Peyton Manning are probably somewhat more likely to get the benefit of borderline calls/non-calls than are Leodis McKelvin and Kyle Orton. The point is that this is not the reason the Bills have stunk for 15 years. It's not the reason the Bills have lost not only to Tom Brady a zillion times, but also to the Jets, the Dolphins, Houston, Cleveland, Cincinnati, and the other non-glamor teams a zillion times. The Bills have earned that record all by themselves.

[SwampD]

I didn't say that. I said that if the only data we have include both objective and subjective calls, it is a mistake to disregard the data, even though it is imperfect.

 

 

 

Do you think Claude's hypothetical proved anything? "If this had happened in a Bills game, the Bills would've been penalized?" That's boom-worthy? If you think it is, your other theories become more understandable.

 

As for the bolded: the refs are human and probably do bring some bias to the table. As TBPhD points out, Calvin Johnson and Peyton Manning are probably somewhat more likely to get the benefit of borderline calls/non-calls than are Leodis McKelvin and Kyle Orton. The point is that this is not the reason the Bills have stunk for 15 years. It's not the reason the Bills have lost not only to Tom Brady a zillion times, but also to the Jets, the Dolphins, Houston, Cleveland, Cincinnati, and the other non-glamor teams a zillion times. The Bills have earned that record all by themselves.

Who is talking about why the Bills have stunk for 15 years? We are talking about the refs being biased and having effected the outcomes of games this year, which they have.

 

I know in your magical football fairyland, every Bills rush should be a first down and every Bills pass should be a touchdown, then we wouldn't care about bad officiating. In the real world, though, of close games decided by a single score, an officiating crew that brings its biases with them and makes calls accordingly can be the difference between winning and losing, and IMO has been that difference in some games this year.

[TrueBlueGED]

I didn't say that. I said that if the only data we have include both objective and subjective calls, it is a mistake to disregard the data, even though it is imperfect.

 

For starters I never said to disregard it completely, just that it's not really getting at the crux of the debate. Secondly, if a measure is fatally flawed, we should not be required to draw inferences from it just because it's all we have. The question is whether these data are fatally flawed, or simply imperfect.