After 15 games of the 2013 regular season,the gross yards gained and allowed are as follows:
Yards gained:
Hamilton 6,253
Calgary 6,164
Saskatchewan 5,959
Toronto 5,745
Edmonton 5,623
Bc 5,310
Montreal 5,099
Winnipeg 4,459
Yards allowed:
BC 5,070
Montreal 5,191
Saskatchewan 5,340
Calgary 5,419
Hamilton 5,609
Edmonton 5,777
Winnipeg 5,972
Toronto 6,234
Variance between offensive and defensive yards:
Calgary +745
Hamilton +644
Saskatchewan +619
BC +240
Montreal -92
Edmonton -154
Toronto-489
Winnipeg -1,513
Total 0
Based on these statistics, Calgary and Hamilton could be in the Grey Cup game. It is still a long way to go, but presently I say that Calgary and Hamilton will play for the 2013 Grey Cup; I don't expect Toronto to be in the Grey Cup.
You could well be right about Hamilton being in the Grey Cup this year. I think they are a much stronger team today than at the beginning of the season and.... they continue to get stronger.
Statistically, Calgary should be in the the Grey Cup but statistics don't mean a whole lot come playoff time. The leading rusher could have a bad game, get injured or be shut down by the opposition. The starting QB could get injured or get "stage fright [aka choke]. Poor refereeing could influence the outcome. Weather could play a major factor.
It will only take one game to dash Calgary's hopes of making it to the Grey Cup and both the Lions and Roughriders are capable of beating the Stamps.
Personally, I would love to see a Lions/Ti-Cats Grey Cup game. I've not seen one of those in a long time but I'm not holding my breath.
Surprisingly enough the Cats and Stamps have only met twice in the Grey Cup(98,99)and the Cats and Lions have only met three times in the Grey Cup(63,64,85)in the 100 yrs of Grey Cups.....Granted B.C didn't officially get a franchise until 1954 but still you would think in such a small league,that they would have matched up a little more often then that.
Both Calgary(98) and Ham(99) have split one a piece,and the Lions hold a 2-1 margin over the Cats,winning in(64,85)and Ham winning in (63).It also seems kind of odd that both times have been back to back years with both teams winning one and losing one.The other team from the West(Saskatchewan)has met the Cats also only 3 times in the Cup(67,72,89)The Cats winning in(67,72)and the Riders in the famous best game ever played Cup of 89.I don't really have a preference if the Cats actually do make it to the show this year,it's been to long,I'll just be happy to once again see them in the final,1999......................sigh!!!!!
seems like a century ago!!!! :roll:
Another thing to consider about Hamilton is they essentially played one less game than the rest. I am speaking of course of the 37-0 thrashing the Cats took in Regina this year. Even with that horrible game they still have the most yards.
The game vs. the Stamps in Guelph was also a very low offensive production. This last game vs the Argos they had over 500 yards.
Sure…or you could look at it as they are 1st in yards and 5th in scoring…tells me there are serious issues inside the 20. I have not looked it up, but I assume this is a good indicator of redzone inneficiency.
What else does it say about this high powered club that at times lacks the ability to finish drives? With al those yards, they do not lead in differential…aka…their D is killing them at times.
Simply put…picking one stat says little about a club.
The Bombers have the most rushing TDs. Does this mean they have the best rushing O? I mean, they sit 7th.
The Esks have the fewest passes thrown agains, completed against and 2nd fewest yards against. Does this mean their secondary is the best in the league? Or is it that they have the worst fun D by 300 yards? Because I mean, they are 0.1% completion against from having the worst pass D percentage wise.
Stats can tell any story you want if you spin it enough…especially when you take just 1.
The way you are spinning it can make it look like something else, but the OP used Gross Yards for and against. That tells everything. Basically, Hamilton should have a better record than they do.
Hamilton started the season off with a 1-4 record. Since then, they have been 7-3 (of which 2 of them could easily have been wins). You may not want to admit it, but the Tiger-Cats are definitely the team to watch out for in the East.
I never said they weren’t, and I stated them as my favs out of the East before the seasone started. Even when they started out of the gate at 1-4 and many were expressing extreme disapointment I continued to express my stance, and pointed out that it would take them a few weeks to hit their stride with the heavy turn over and new staff. I believe they are a very strong team, and have from day 1.
The way I posted it was exactly my point though…taking a single stat…net +/- yards for example, can be very misleading, and is a lot easier to get tunnel vision on than looking at varying stats. I have always hated the expression that stats/numbers don’t lie, because, like I said, they can be easily scewed to support one’s stance. Also as I pointed out…those stats tell us a lot more…inability to finish drives. They shouldn’t be 5th in scoring if you take this as a primary indicator. Is it an indicator…you bet, but there are a lot of other indicators as well…red zone efficiency being one, and IMO one of the most important stats…they are 2nd worst in giveaway/takeaway.
3 other huge stats they have done well with are time of possession, rushing and discipline (I believe they have 2nd least penalty yardage against). I believe they are in 3rd for rushing, which is pretty impressive considering their rushing numbers early in the season. Thier D is also playing MILES better than the start of the season.
Take Montreal’s defensive stats…pretty impressive, but how much more impressive would they be if their O was better? Stats tell a big part of the story, but focussing on one stat and only looking at it from one angle is rarely a good approach in anything in life.
I have rarely seen someone type so many words yet say so little.
Hamilton has had some issues in the red zone at times, but also a lot of success. You can never score if you don't move the ball. Hamilton moves it better than anyone. Period.
I guess the correlation of moving the ball and finishing drives is too much for you to grasp then then. Also sorry to hear that you couldn’t comprehend my differentiation of quantitative vs analytical comparisons.
lol…my point of being elaborate in previous posts. lol
Crazy idea right, elaborating one’s point of discussion in a chat forum. :cowboy: I guess I should post concise college level technical terminology regarding statistics in at least one person’s eyes.
The issue is not my comprehension of what you're saying. It's not hard at all to comprehend simple run of the mill language, like the type you love to use.
The issue is that you don't offer anything worthy of note. They are all observations that anyone awake at the games could make, and you ignore the point of this thread. Maybe you need to read the thread title again.
Is regurgitation a good thing where you come from? Because you love to do it with the words you type. A few that are too slow to get the same from you do not make you right in any regard. You must be used to being heard in a crowd of fools.
