Quote:Break it down to where we can see if those games were continual blowouts and you'll have a point.

 

The references you linked aren't granular enough for this discussion.

Blowouts are immaterial and, standing alone, mean nothing.  A loss is a loss is a loss in the final standings.

 

They could be a reflection of poor matchups.  They could be a reflection of little talent.  They could be a reflection of poor coaching.

 

Similarly, the lack of blowouts could be a reflection of more favorable matchups, talent, or marginally better coaching, or some combination of all of the above.

 

But to humor you, Johnson's 1989 team had SIX (6) losses of 17 or more points (defining "blowout" as a loss of 17 points or more), and there was a 7th in the first four games of 1990.

 

Walsh's 1979 team had ONE (1) loss of 17 points or more, and his 1980 team had THREE (3) losses of 17 points or more, including a 59-14 loss to Dallas.

 

So what wins out, Walsh's one loss of 17 points or more in 1979 with two wins,  or Walsh's six wins with 3 blowout losses?  Do you suggest that somehow Walsh's 1980 team that won three times as many games as the 1979 team was somehow inferior?

 

Bradley had SIX (6) losses last year of 17 points or more and four wins, and has four thus far this season with no wins.

 

What wins, Bradley's 4 wins with 6 blowout losses or Walsh's 2 wins and 1 blowout loss?  Is Bradley's 4 wins with 6 blowout losses somehow equal to Jimmy Johnson's 1 win season with the same 6 blowout losses?

---