I'm a believer in all of these things to a degree, and this is how I see teams psychological states this week.
First, a note on bouncebacks. I know Nolan stated there is no such thing as the "Zig Zag Theory", which I had never heard of before, but sounded similar in some ways to a bounceback. These are not the same thing as I see it. I don't expect EVERY single team, EVERY time, to lose if they won, and vice versa. Perhaps a bit more likely mediocre teams will do this, but not top- or bottom- tier teams. Obviously this must be true, or every team would go 8-8. Plus the way the data was tabulated in that article was suspect to me at best (sorry Nolan). But think about it. If I am not mistaken, every team's result from the prior game was taken, and then compared to their result in the current game. If you do that, the data has to be skewed towards the middle, it's unavoidable. If you've got 2 teams off wins (or 2 off losses for that matter), assuming the game doesn't end in a tie, one team must lose and one must win. Every time you do that you are getting closer to a 50% result. So of course the data is going to reflect a result extremely close to a .500 record, because that is the case in so many matchups...two teams both off wins or both off losses.
I think of bouncebacks as good teams off uncharacteristic losses, and bad teams off unexpected wins. In particular, a good team off a loss to a bad team, and vice versa. There is no shame in losing to Kansas City on the road. But lose to Arizona at home and it's going to hurt. The good team smartens up and gets back on track, and does not (usually) go into a prolonged slump. The bad teams ease up when they finally get a win. They press so hard for that win, they finally get it, then they relax and go right back to what they were always doing....losing. Occasionally that breakout win works as a springboard, but not usually. If you're bad, you're going to generally continue to be bad.
Overlooks: Most people know what this means. Also known as sandwich games. You play a big rival in games 1 and 3, and a team you couldn't care less about in the middle. The team overlooks the middle game and loses. Or in the case of a big favorite, they do just enough to win, but they don't cover the huge spread.
Letdowns: Similar to overlooks, but dependent on the previous week's result, and not dependent on which opponent comes up after this week's game. IE. A good team wins an important divisional game last week. There's a letdown now when they play a non-conference or non-rival team. But had they lost that game, no letdown usually...they use this game to get back on track.
Breakouts and Shutdowns: These are concepts I learned from SteveH, an incredible NBA handicapper you may know from another forum. Steve is not (in my opinion) your typical sports guy at all. He's 100% numbers and statistics. He doesn't watch the games on TV...says he finds it boring. He doesn't even know the names of most of the players - he just wants to know if anyone really important is missing the game. He is more fascinated with the mathematics of the game, and seeing if he can "crack the code" so to speak, and predict winners. He wins consistently in hoops looking at JUST this. While initially tailored for basketball, I find his concepts work in all sports. Basically, it's this...
A team plays against a string of teams with stingy defences, and then goes up against a very soft D. In most cases the team's offence goes berzerk and scores in droves. Playing against all that tough defence made the offence better in the long run. The same thing happens when facing lots of lousy D, then a very good one (offence gets shut down). Also works vs runs of teams with very good or very bad O. Or playing against teams that are excellent against the pass, and then one that is awful against the pass. Basically, playing a string of teams that are overly good or bad at ANY aspect of the game, and then playing a team that is the opposite, will give you an extreme result.
So with all that in mind, here is an idea on how I think each team will be prepared mentally for this week's games. Reads like this:
Team: Last opponent - This weeks' opponents - Next week
Wins in green, losses in red.
NY Giants: Mia - @ NE - Philly
New England: Tenn - NYG - @ Mia
My take: Possible overlook situation for New England maybe, content off a win and @ Miami next? NYG in a similar position with a divisional game on tap as well. No real edge, except NYG is off a loss.
Tampa Bay: Ind - @ Wash - @ SF
Washington: @ Phil - TB - @ Buf
My take: Rebound or collapse for Tampa Bay? I'm thinking rebound is more likely. Wash should be ready, but this opponent is a step up in class from recent foes. Too contradictory for me to consider a bet.
Oakland: @ Chi - @ Clev - KC
Cleveland: @ Pitt - Oak - Sea
My take: Oak's got two wins, each by a FG, at home against very weak opponents. It doesn't appear they can beat anyone but the weakest of opponents, under ideal circumstances. 2nd-straight trip halfway across the country for a road game. But this is a winnable game preceding a very difficult game. For Clev, like last year they have been better away than at home (LY 6-2 away, 3-5 @ home). Browns still winless at home this year too (home field disadvantage??). Something's gotta break, but I'm not sure what. At first I thought hands-down Clev win, but now I am not so sure. Both teams face the possibility of starting off 2-5 for the year, since the next opponents are tougher for each. (Edit - I'm rethinking this game, see the post a few messages down)
Carolina: NO - @ Indy - Tenn
Indianapolis: @ TB - Car - Bye
My take: Initial thoughts: Go against Indy, as they are off a huge, emotional comeback win on MNF. It's got to be hard to have your head in the game for a non-conference opponent when you've just pulled off something so wonderful. They're going into a bye, and facing another undefeated team, so that should get their attention and have them focused...but they're human. An outright Carolina win would not be a huge surprise. The downside: Carolina has been winning, but against far inferior opponents. They crushed the Falcons, then didn't play quite as well, but still beat New Orleans. These are the signs of a team that is about to lose, and Indy is a big step up in class, especially defensively. (Yes, I know Indy's given up a lot of pts lately, but I still think they are very good this way). Regardless, I think taking Carolina + the pts is the way to go here. I don't see them falling apart completely...they should at least be in the game.
Kansas City: Den - @ GB - @ Oak
Green Bay: Sea - KC - @ StL
My take: Oh how I wish GB had lost last week. Then I think this would be a slam dunk Packers pick, and they'd be getting pts as well. GB is not the team they once were, but they've looked good at home the last couple of games, and should be confident. Mainly though I like GB here because this is unfamiliar territory for the Chiefs. Coming off a really tight, huge game against the Broncos, this spells letdown. KC's gone from spanking opponents to eeking out victories, and they've got to run out of gas somewhere. Oakland is on the horizon too. Oak may not be much of a team anymore, but this is a divisional sandwich game. Hard to think you could overlook the Packers when you are going into Lambeau field, but this seems like a pretty good spot for KC to take loss #1.
(to be continued....)
First, a note on bouncebacks. I know Nolan stated there is no such thing as the "Zig Zag Theory", which I had never heard of before, but sounded similar in some ways to a bounceback. These are not the same thing as I see it. I don't expect EVERY single team, EVERY time, to lose if they won, and vice versa. Perhaps a bit more likely mediocre teams will do this, but not top- or bottom- tier teams. Obviously this must be true, or every team would go 8-8. Plus the way the data was tabulated in that article was suspect to me at best (sorry Nolan). But think about it. If I am not mistaken, every team's result from the prior game was taken, and then compared to their result in the current game. If you do that, the data has to be skewed towards the middle, it's unavoidable. If you've got 2 teams off wins (or 2 off losses for that matter), assuming the game doesn't end in a tie, one team must lose and one must win. Every time you do that you are getting closer to a 50% result. So of course the data is going to reflect a result extremely close to a .500 record, because that is the case in so many matchups...two teams both off wins or both off losses.
I think of bouncebacks as good teams off uncharacteristic losses, and bad teams off unexpected wins. In particular, a good team off a loss to a bad team, and vice versa. There is no shame in losing to Kansas City on the road. But lose to Arizona at home and it's going to hurt. The good team smartens up and gets back on track, and does not (usually) go into a prolonged slump. The bad teams ease up when they finally get a win. They press so hard for that win, they finally get it, then they relax and go right back to what they were always doing....losing. Occasionally that breakout win works as a springboard, but not usually. If you're bad, you're going to generally continue to be bad.
Overlooks: Most people know what this means. Also known as sandwich games. You play a big rival in games 1 and 3, and a team you couldn't care less about in the middle. The team overlooks the middle game and loses. Or in the case of a big favorite, they do just enough to win, but they don't cover the huge spread.
Letdowns: Similar to overlooks, but dependent on the previous week's result, and not dependent on which opponent comes up after this week's game. IE. A good team wins an important divisional game last week. There's a letdown now when they play a non-conference or non-rival team. But had they lost that game, no letdown usually...they use this game to get back on track.
Breakouts and Shutdowns: These are concepts I learned from SteveH, an incredible NBA handicapper you may know from another forum. Steve is not (in my opinion) your typical sports guy at all. He's 100% numbers and statistics. He doesn't watch the games on TV...says he finds it boring. He doesn't even know the names of most of the players - he just wants to know if anyone really important is missing the game. He is more fascinated with the mathematics of the game, and seeing if he can "crack the code" so to speak, and predict winners. He wins consistently in hoops looking at JUST this. While initially tailored for basketball, I find his concepts work in all sports. Basically, it's this...
A team plays against a string of teams with stingy defences, and then goes up against a very soft D. In most cases the team's offence goes berzerk and scores in droves. Playing against all that tough defence made the offence better in the long run. The same thing happens when facing lots of lousy D, then a very good one (offence gets shut down). Also works vs runs of teams with very good or very bad O. Or playing against teams that are excellent against the pass, and then one that is awful against the pass. Basically, playing a string of teams that are overly good or bad at ANY aspect of the game, and then playing a team that is the opposite, will give you an extreme result.
So with all that in mind, here is an idea on how I think each team will be prepared mentally for this week's games. Reads like this:
Team: Last opponent - This weeks' opponents - Next week
Wins in green, losses in red.
NY Giants: Mia - @ NE - Philly
New England: Tenn - NYG - @ Mia
My take: Possible overlook situation for New England maybe, content off a win and @ Miami next? NYG in a similar position with a divisional game on tap as well. No real edge, except NYG is off a loss.
Tampa Bay: Ind - @ Wash - @ SF
Washington: @ Phil - TB - @ Buf
My take: Rebound or collapse for Tampa Bay? I'm thinking rebound is more likely. Wash should be ready, but this opponent is a step up in class from recent foes. Too contradictory for me to consider a bet.
Oakland: @ Chi - @ Clev - KC
Cleveland: @ Pitt - Oak - Sea
My take: Oak's got two wins, each by a FG, at home against very weak opponents. It doesn't appear they can beat anyone but the weakest of opponents, under ideal circumstances. 2nd-straight trip halfway across the country for a road game. But this is a winnable game preceding a very difficult game. For Clev, like last year they have been better away than at home (LY 6-2 away, 3-5 @ home). Browns still winless at home this year too (home field disadvantage??). Something's gotta break, but I'm not sure what. At first I thought hands-down Clev win, but now I am not so sure. Both teams face the possibility of starting off 2-5 for the year, since the next opponents are tougher for each. (Edit - I'm rethinking this game, see the post a few messages down)
Carolina: NO - @ Indy - Tenn
Indianapolis: @ TB - Car - Bye
My take: Initial thoughts: Go against Indy, as they are off a huge, emotional comeback win on MNF. It's got to be hard to have your head in the game for a non-conference opponent when you've just pulled off something so wonderful. They're going into a bye, and facing another undefeated team, so that should get their attention and have them focused...but they're human. An outright Carolina win would not be a huge surprise. The downside: Carolina has been winning, but against far inferior opponents. They crushed the Falcons, then didn't play quite as well, but still beat New Orleans. These are the signs of a team that is about to lose, and Indy is a big step up in class, especially defensively. (Yes, I know Indy's given up a lot of pts lately, but I still think they are very good this way). Regardless, I think taking Carolina + the pts is the way to go here. I don't see them falling apart completely...they should at least be in the game.
Kansas City: Den - @ GB - @ Oak
Green Bay: Sea - KC - @ StL
My take: Oh how I wish GB had lost last week. Then I think this would be a slam dunk Packers pick, and they'd be getting pts as well. GB is not the team they once were, but they've looked good at home the last couple of games, and should be confident. Mainly though I like GB here because this is unfamiliar territory for the Chiefs. Coming off a really tight, huge game against the Broncos, this spells letdown. KC's gone from spanking opponents to eeking out victories, and they've got to run out of gas somewhere. Oakland is on the horizon too. Oak may not be much of a team anymore, but this is a divisional sandwich game. Hard to think you could overlook the Packers when you are going into Lambeau field, but this seems like a pretty good spot for KC to take loss #1.
(to be continued....)
Last edited:
Actually, knowing the NFL, this probably will be the most exciting game of the week...seems to happen in nothing games a lot. Seriously doubt I bet this game. Gun to the head I'd take the points. Had Chi not won last week the line here would be more like -7ish, and there'd still be an avalanche of money on the Saints. Hmmm.
