Just some interesting observations about the unpredictability of the NFL:
1. Am watching Bears/Vikings bc two NFC teams that could compete for the playoffs and Bears are on our schedule. Plus, I'm quite intrigued with the debate around which of Johnson and MacDonald were the better hires. Plus they dropped 59 pts on the Cards after Johnson stated their goal is the highest-scoring team in history (in other words, surpassing that Denver 8-43 SB team 🤣
It's 6-3 Vikings at the half, really terribly played game both sides -- and so glad our back-up QB is Lock and not Wentz.
2. Titans only trailing Green Bay 14-10 at the half
3. Bucs only leading Cleveland 9-6 at the half
We'll see how the other "sucky" teams do in the afternoon slate (Cards, Raiders, Fins and Commanders). But apparently there are no gimme's in this league folks
Kenneth will you be posting a link for the Substack game-time chat?
All Seasiders: if you've not yet joined that Seaside Joe chat link during a Seahawks game, I strongly recommend you give it a try. Is REALLY fun and I'm always amazed by the insights amongst us, is a really awesome thread.
Sometimes he does, sometimes he does not. Go to the front page. Under the title there is a menu bar. Click on Chat and it will take you there. Wait for Joe to start the chat. There are a few other comments going on right now.
Have no idea bias I'm about to expound, but let's call it EMF (the electromagnetic fields surrounding the Niners that leads to their injury-proneness):
Glendale against AZ is our EMF. Yes we normally win, but for whatever reason the scores are rarely if ever as dilated as one would expect. Last 10 yrs, Seattle vs AZ in Glendale:
2016: 6-6 (that maddening tie game when Wagz had the leaping/flying blocked kick)
2017: 22-16
2018: 27-24
2019: 13-27 (gulp, the widest spread is a loss...)
2020: 28-21
2021: 38-30
2022: 31-21
2023: 21-20
2024: 30-18
2025: 23-20
Even last year's SB-winning team only beat them by 3 in Glendale last year.
Some consolation perhaps from the '13 and '14 SB teams: the '13 team won 34-22 and the 2014 team won by a Danno-type margin at 35-6.
But with my EMF bias as to Glendale, I foresee a close win similar to the spread which is -3.5 Seattle.
I'm not much of a prediction guy, but I do enjoy reading WHY someone got to a particular conclusion. Part of why I don't make many predictions is I just don't care what the score is or who the best players are in a game.....as long as we win and some group of players do really well. Horton back is exciting. Line him up wide left, and have him work back right and deep. Lock gets to him on his 3rd read if he gets the time. Just don't flatten the ball out Drew, get some loft on it and let Tory run to it. Either a TD or a DPI.....either work.
Sorry, but 8 is not a statistically impossible number of wins. It's the "logically necessary mean", i.e. 8 is the true value average where, if all other factors are disregarded, the mathematics will always average out to. More simply put, in a 16 game regular season (the study is from 2025), and if you exclude Ties as an option, the average number of wins for a team will be 8.
Fans of a team predicting 8.1+ (9.59/10.30 in the study) does not mean they are predicting something impossible, they are predicting something "illogical". Although as I said above, this is only "illogical" if you are disregarding all non-mathematical factors. I.e. you have to ignore whether or not a team is good or bad.
If I rounded up 52 other Joe's and replaced the Browns, our "logically necessary mean" would be 8. Because we have to ignore our amateur status, the fact we'd all end up in A&E by the end of the 1st Qtr, and every other possible understanding we would be worse than useless. Yet somehow we'd be better than the actual Browns.
A statistically impossible number of wins for 2015 would be 17. Because there are not 17 games in a 2015 regular season. Or for our team of Joes, it would be 1. For the Browns in any given year, it should be 1.
Is this kind of pedantic, yes. But it's important! The studies base point is not that "every team should get 8 wins in a season, to predict otherwise is folly". It's that fans, even of bad teams, will believe their team can win more often than the maths says they should. But that maths has to ignore any and all real-world impacting factors.
Which frankly, seems incredibly pointless as a study. Like, I could tell you the league average for wins in a given year will be half the total number of games played. Where optimism bias does become interesting is when you do factor in the real world, because that is the beating heart of sports!
I've dunked on the Browns here, because well, they're the Browns. But to be a fan of the Browns defies all logic. That's what makes it interesting. A Browns fan goes into every week believing they can defy logic, defy the maths, and pull off something incredible - not embarrass themselves. Ok they fail over and over at this. But the joy of sports is the belief! If sport was just about numbers it would not be fun.
Right, that made it worth me reading through the whole study. Gotta say, the actual conclusions of the study are "People like things they like". There is a brief touch on media influence, and on recent success, but very much in passing. The base premise is just flawed, looking at sports inside a vacuum where you disregard all real world factors and say "well, the statistical average is 8 therefore above this is bias" is... it's not stupid but it's willfully ignorant.
Yeah this was for too much of a comment on a throwaway study and sentence from Kenneth. I also appreciate the irony in my conclusion here being sports are illogical coming a day after I posted a video link all about reliance on statistics in sports (if anyone missed it, please watch this, it's really really good https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bs6dAm72FPM)
Optimism bias is our fate. This is our away game for this season. Gameday is my wife's birthday and the whole trip is my gift. We visited her niece's family today in Flagstaff, a (very scenic) two hour drive each way.
The Hawks need to destroy the Cards or else we will be forced to drink heavily in some Glendale dive bar, of which there are many. But this is the NFL and anything can happen. We met some other 12s on the plane down who have seats near ours. I'm gonna be optimistic.
Murph will be a nightmare for the center and guards tomorrow. Big Leo will see Murph gets the lion's share of accolades as they both begin setting the table. Why give anything away? Because he's built that way and is looking out for his younger Brothers. Byron won't tire, but we can expect to see Rylie adding to the nightmare when Big Cat takes a breather. Soon, Brisset will feel the heat and begin making errors, as in fumbles and INTs. Unlike our Home Games, this time they'll be able to hear the adjustments called out, instead of hand signal. Good for our newer members. I'm thinking MM wants to lead the League this year in interceptions. Watch out for our Rookie Neal. Soon we'll have Bud Clark back, to boot.
Horton will be raring to go and the Guys will support his efforts if he initially does well. Sitting aside on the injury sidelines is pure hell for these guys and a STATEMENT will be made. Getting Coach into the spirit will be the biggest obstacle. (Rules are rules). Our O-Line has statements to make to our Defense as regards the exceptional efforts they have made this last year in securing a Super Bowl a year early while they learned to gel. Open not just holes, but Avenues... Thus, big stats for all our RBs. The Run Game then opens Lock's throwing arm. No need to take big risks, Drew. Advantage: Us. Wait on the obvious.
Since AB is out I predict Lock goes 40 for 40 for 750 yards and 20 TDs. Just kidding. We win 28 to 13. The Dark Side gets 3 turn overs and Price runs for over 90 yards.
Thanks for the brain worm. How does one quantify the degree of "Optimism Bias" if fan predictions are accurate? Is it 'bias' if a prediction proves to be accurate? Regarding the three 2025 games against the Rams, did Rams fans have MORE Optimism 'bias' than Seahawk fans when Rams fans predicted who would win wrong two out of three times? Makes my head hurt. I believe it's slightly less confusing for one to measure the confounding variable of optimism after the 2nd or 3rd toke...of course, I may be bias.
Well your homer optimism is not me. I’m opposite of what you started this post with. And even more so this week. But I will say I was not aware they scored 24+ so much in 2025. Just like the consecutive wins, etc, other than JSN, all these great stats for last year seem shocking. High sacks but no one dominated. High scoring but no one other than JSN. Many TOs and only EJ showed out. But I go into each weekend thinking the worse. So a win but too close for comfort.
Why not? If the marine mammals managed a perfect season ending early '73, why not another nautically oriented team like Seahawks in '26 right? The Hawks retired #12 in '85 and 85 minus 73 is 12! So, according to Bob's Book of Numerology the and the constant axiom of "twelve is one", The Hawks should be the next 'one' to have a perfect season. No bias here, it's all math right?
Yes, but if Christian Haynes has a good to great game then his value goes way up on the trade market. I would attach the right side of the line if I’m the DC for Arizona.
Chat started. Come on over.
Just some interesting observations about the unpredictability of the NFL:
1. Am watching Bears/Vikings bc two NFC teams that could compete for the playoffs and Bears are on our schedule. Plus, I'm quite intrigued with the debate around which of Johnson and MacDonald were the better hires. Plus they dropped 59 pts on the Cards after Johnson stated their goal is the highest-scoring team in history (in other words, surpassing that Denver 8-43 SB team 🤣
It's 6-3 Vikings at the half, really terribly played game both sides -- and so glad our back-up QB is Lock and not Wentz.
2. Titans only trailing Green Bay 14-10 at the half
3. Bucs only leading Cleveland 9-6 at the half
We'll see how the other "sucky" teams do in the afternoon slate (Cards, Raiders, Fins and Commanders). But apparently there are no gimme's in this league folks
Chicago scores 62 points in the first two weeks of the season -- and loses the second game 9-3. I feel bad for Bears fans. What a horrible way to die.
Yeah losing Williams is such a blow
2:00 to go and I'm 4 points down on my Survivor Pool pick. Not a good week.
Kenneth will you be posting a link for the Substack game-time chat?
All Seasiders: if you've not yet joined that Seaside Joe chat link during a Seahawks game, I strongly recommend you give it a try. Is REALLY fun and I'm always amazed by the insights amongst us, is a really awesome thread.
Sometimes he does, sometimes he does not. Go to the front page. Under the title there is a menu bar. Click on Chat and it will take you there. Wait for Joe to start the chat. There are a few other comments going on right now.
Have no idea bias I'm about to expound, but let's call it EMF (the electromagnetic fields surrounding the Niners that leads to their injury-proneness):
Glendale against AZ is our EMF. Yes we normally win, but for whatever reason the scores are rarely if ever as dilated as one would expect. Last 10 yrs, Seattle vs AZ in Glendale:
2016: 6-6 (that maddening tie game when Wagz had the leaping/flying blocked kick)
2017: 22-16
2018: 27-24
2019: 13-27 (gulp, the widest spread is a loss...)
2020: 28-21
2021: 38-30
2022: 31-21
2023: 21-20
2024: 30-18
2025: 23-20
Even last year's SB-winning team only beat them by 3 in Glendale last year.
Some consolation perhaps from the '13 and '14 SB teams: the '13 team won 34-22 and the 2014 team won by a Danno-type margin at 35-6.
But with my EMF bias as to Glendale, I foresee a close win similar to the spread which is -3.5 Seattle.
I think the right side of the O line defines if we win and by how much! Go Hawks. Hawks 23 Birds 13
I'm not much of a prediction guy, but I do enjoy reading WHY someone got to a particular conclusion. Part of why I don't make many predictions is I just don't care what the score is or who the best players are in a game.....as long as we win and some group of players do really well. Horton back is exciting. Line him up wide left, and have him work back right and deep. Lock gets to him on his 3rd read if he gets the time. Just don't flatten the ball out Drew, get some loft on it and let Tory run to it. Either a TD or a DPI.....either work.
Sorry, but 8 is not a statistically impossible number of wins. It's the "logically necessary mean", i.e. 8 is the true value average where, if all other factors are disregarded, the mathematics will always average out to. More simply put, in a 16 game regular season (the study is from 2025), and if you exclude Ties as an option, the average number of wins for a team will be 8.
Fans of a team predicting 8.1+ (9.59/10.30 in the study) does not mean they are predicting something impossible, they are predicting something "illogical". Although as I said above, this is only "illogical" if you are disregarding all non-mathematical factors. I.e. you have to ignore whether or not a team is good or bad.
If I rounded up 52 other Joe's and replaced the Browns, our "logically necessary mean" would be 8. Because we have to ignore our amateur status, the fact we'd all end up in A&E by the end of the 1st Qtr, and every other possible understanding we would be worse than useless. Yet somehow we'd be better than the actual Browns.
A statistically impossible number of wins for 2015 would be 17. Because there are not 17 games in a 2015 regular season. Or for our team of Joes, it would be 1. For the Browns in any given year, it should be 1.
Is this kind of pedantic, yes. But it's important! The studies base point is not that "every team should get 8 wins in a season, to predict otherwise is folly". It's that fans, even of bad teams, will believe their team can win more often than the maths says they should. But that maths has to ignore any and all real-world impacting factors.
Which frankly, seems incredibly pointless as a study. Like, I could tell you the league average for wins in a given year will be half the total number of games played. Where optimism bias does become interesting is when you do factor in the real world, because that is the beating heart of sports!
I've dunked on the Browns here, because well, they're the Browns. But to be a fan of the Browns defies all logic. That's what makes it interesting. A Browns fan goes into every week believing they can defy logic, defy the maths, and pull off something incredible - not embarrass themselves. Ok they fail over and over at this. But the joy of sports is the belief! If sport was just about numbers it would not be fun.
Right, that made it worth me reading through the whole study. Gotta say, the actual conclusions of the study are "People like things they like". There is a brief touch on media influence, and on recent success, but very much in passing. The base premise is just flawed, looking at sports inside a vacuum where you disregard all real world factors and say "well, the statistical average is 8 therefore above this is bias" is... it's not stupid but it's willfully ignorant.
Yeah this was for too much of a comment on a throwaway study and sentence from Kenneth. I also appreciate the irony in my conclusion here being sports are illogical coming a day after I posted a video link all about reliance on statistics in sports (if anyone missed it, please watch this, it's really really good https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bs6dAm72FPM)
Watched it, it was fun.
Optimism bias is our fate. This is our away game for this season. Gameday is my wife's birthday and the whole trip is my gift. We visited her niece's family today in Flagstaff, a (very scenic) two hour drive each way.
The Hawks need to destroy the Cards or else we will be forced to drink heavily in some Glendale dive bar, of which there are many. But this is the NFL and anything can happen. We met some other 12s on the plane down who have seats near ours. I'm gonna be optimistic.
Murph will be a nightmare for the center and guards tomorrow. Big Leo will see Murph gets the lion's share of accolades as they both begin setting the table. Why give anything away? Because he's built that way and is looking out for his younger Brothers. Byron won't tire, but we can expect to see Rylie adding to the nightmare when Big Cat takes a breather. Soon, Brisset will feel the heat and begin making errors, as in fumbles and INTs. Unlike our Home Games, this time they'll be able to hear the adjustments called out, instead of hand signal. Good for our newer members. I'm thinking MM wants to lead the League this year in interceptions. Watch out for our Rookie Neal. Soon we'll have Bud Clark back, to boot.
Horton will be raring to go and the Guys will support his efforts if he initially does well. Sitting aside on the injury sidelines is pure hell for these guys and a STATEMENT will be made. Getting Coach into the spirit will be the biggest obstacle. (Rules are rules). Our O-Line has statements to make to our Defense as regards the exceptional efforts they have made this last year in securing a Super Bowl a year early while they learned to gel. Open not just holes, but Avenues... Thus, big stats for all our RBs. The Run Game then opens Lock's throwing arm. No need to take big risks, Drew. Advantage: Us. Wait on the obvious.
McBride went for 95 yards against the Bolts.. Seems like he always gives us problems. Contain him will go a long way to helping us win.
I think I’m the one who had JSN at 122yds but I had the score 24-21 Seattle which I missed badly.
In my defense, the avg points Seattle has had in the 7 other games when JSN went over 120 was 29.7 so this NE game was an outlier
Since AB is out I predict Lock goes 40 for 40 for 750 yards and 20 TDs. Just kidding. We win 28 to 13. The Dark Side gets 3 turn overs and Price runs for over 90 yards.
Here I was…all ready to quickly draft a comment about those who think Price won’t get to 86 yards are nuts.
A tiny little voice whispered I’d better check what I had predicted. That stupid voice was smart because I submitted 85 yards for Price.
I guess I’ll take the under too.
Thanks for the brain worm. How does one quantify the degree of "Optimism Bias" if fan predictions are accurate? Is it 'bias' if a prediction proves to be accurate? Regarding the three 2025 games against the Rams, did Rams fans have MORE Optimism 'bias' than Seahawk fans when Rams fans predicted who would win wrong two out of three times? Makes my head hurt. I believe it's slightly less confusing for one to measure the confounding variable of optimism after the 2nd or 3rd toke...of course, I may be bias.
Well your homer optimism is not me. I’m opposite of what you started this post with. And even more so this week. But I will say I was not aware they scored 24+ so much in 2025. Just like the consecutive wins, etc, other than JSN, all these great stats for last year seem shocking. High sacks but no one dominated. High scoring but no one other than JSN. Many TOs and only EJ showed out. But I go into each weekend thinking the worse. So a win but too close for comfort.
I predict a Seahawks 20-0 record every year. I’m not optimistic. I just haven’t aligned my prediction with the correct year, just yet.
2026 would be nice!
Why not? If the marine mammals managed a perfect season ending early '73, why not another nautically oriented team like Seahawks in '26 right? The Hawks retired #12 in '85 and 85 minus 73 is 12! So, according to Bob's Book of Numerology the and the constant axiom of "twelve is one", The Hawks should be the next 'one' to have a perfect season. No bias here, it's all math right?
Now my brain hurts...:)
“Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part that wonders what the part that isn't thinking isn't thinking of.”
- They Might Be Giants
“Whoa…that's deep dude.” (* followed by some circa 60's head bobbing *)
That's what I thought 🤓
Ouch, dammit. I need a beer...
That’s just science. You can take it to the bank.
Does Bradford being out change your predictions Joe?
Apparently, his pass protection really sucked last week. But the man is a bulldozer when building inroads.
Yes, but if Christian Haynes has a good to great game then his value goes way up on the trade market. I would attach the right side of the line if I’m the DC for Arizona.