renesauz
IBL Representative
I heard something on Sirius on my way to work last night, and then again on GMFB this morning when I was laying down to sleep: The discussion was about the homefield advantage the Jaguars enjoy in London....except in both cases the speakers were making a case for such advantage to be non-existent for the Jaguars. The key data piece to support the statement? The Jags are a 5-5 in their London games, and if they're a .500 team, clearly they enjoy no such advantage and the Bills should steamroll them.
I was amazed at how incredibly short sighted this analysis was. After all....haven't the Jags been a .300 type team for most of the last 10 years? Indeed...they've had just TWO winning seasons since 2013 (and the second was last year at a whopping 9), and had seasons mixed in there of 4,3,5,3,5,6,1, and 3 wins. That's a staggering win percentage of .179. That's right, the win rate in London for the Jags is more then double their normal win rate. Isn't that the entire definition of "Home field advantage"? More, if BAD Jaguars teams enjoyed this level of success in London, shouldn't it follow that a decent Jaguars team would win even MORE often?
Horrific lack of insight by the analysts, IMHO
I was amazed at how incredibly short sighted this analysis was. After all....haven't the Jags been a .300 type team for most of the last 10 years? Indeed...they've had just TWO winning seasons since 2013 (and the second was last year at a whopping 9), and had seasons mixed in there of 4,3,5,3,5,6,1, and 3 wins. That's a staggering win percentage of .179. That's right, the win rate in London for the Jags is more then double their normal win rate. Isn't that the entire definition of "Home field advantage"? More, if BAD Jaguars teams enjoyed this level of success in London, shouldn't it follow that a decent Jaguars team would win even MORE often?
Horrific lack of insight by the analysts, IMHO