Prediction Q: If you start 0-2, is it time to look to the future?

[Freomaniac]

Eagles started 0-2 with a loss to Freo in Round 1 followed by a heavy loss to Hawthorn in 2013. Starting 0-2 isn't ideal

Well count your lucky stars eagles beat the suns on the weekend, even though it was a sloppy effort.

Had the eagles lost, very likely eagles would of carried that form and lose to the dogs.

I'm tipping eagles to get a narrow win over the dogs at Docklands this round

 

[JT_the_Man]

Geelong is probably the one I’m most curious about here.

They’ve been on the edge of a cliff age wise for what seems like forever now. You can only top up for so long. No Cameron or Danger. Will be curious to see if they are still able to find that gear, and if having to potentially fight for a finals spot late in the season leaves them with nothing in the tank when push comes to shove.

Of course they could just come out and win their next 5 instead, but they weren’t exactly convincing on Saturday...

 

[Freomaniac]

Add Freo on the list when they lose to GWS on Sunday

 

[Freomaniac]

58 teams have started the season 0-2 since 2010 and only 5 of those teams have gone on to play finals.

Pretty big stat.

it's a stupid stat. It doesn't mention 0-2 sides that recover and finish 9,th or 10th.

Just like a midfielder that gets 10-15 kicks a game but his metre gain is -100 metres

 

[iluvparis]

it's a stupid stat. It doesn't mention 0-2 sides that recover and finish 9,th or 10th.

Err why would it - the whole point of the highly predictable stat is that if you start 0-2 you probably aren't winning the flag. Can't do that from 9th or 10th.

 

[gingernuts]

Geelong is probably the one I’m most curious about here.

They’ve been on the edge of a cliff age wise for what seems like forever now. You can only top up for so long. No Cameron or Danger. Will be curious to see if they are still able to find that gear, and if having to potentially fight for a finals spot late in the season leaves them with nothing in the tank when push comes to shove.

Of course they could just come out and win their next 5 instead, but they weren’t exactly convincing on Saturday...

Well JT I am thinking Dangerfield out is a good thing. Be interesting to see what Chris Einstein Scott comes up with.Heres a possibilty Hawkins to tag Charlie Cameron

 

[CasuallyDressed]

Yeah. I think whoever loses out of Brisbane and Geelong tonight will still be, at the very least, in the final 6 sides left in the comp by semi finals week.

 

[HTT]

58 teams have started the season 0-2 since 2010 and only 5 of those teams have gone on to play finals.

Pretty big stat.

I don’t think it’s that telling. Most teams that go 0-2 are just s**t teams and were probably expected to be s**t. They miss finals because of that, not because they started 0-2.
Is anyone really going to put a line through whoever loses tonight’s game?

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

I don’t think it’s that telling. Most teams that go 0-2 are just sh*t teams and were probably expected to be sh*t. They miss finals because of that, not because they started 0-2.
Is anyone really going to put a line through whoever loses tonight’s game?

5 from 58. pretty telling.

 

[iluvparis]

I don’t think it’s that telling. Most teams that go 0-2 are just sh*t teams and were probably expected to be sh*t. They miss finals because of that, not because they started 0-2.
Is anyone really going to put a line through whoever loses tonight’s game?

I'll put a line through Brisbane if they don't win. Geelong more likely to overcome the stat.

 

[HTT]

5 from 58. pretty telling.

How many of the 58 did it actually tell us anything about?

I'll put a line through Brisbane if they don't win. Geelong more likely to overcome the stat.

Either side can overcome it. They will be one game outside of the top 8, and last year they both made finals by well more than one game. As long as the loser tonight is competitive, there’s not much reason to doubt they’ll be about as good as they were last year - and that’s good enough to make up one game.

 

[Angus Young]

I'll put a line through Brisbane if they don't win. Geelong more likely to overcome the stat.

yep Geelong will be fine

 

[JT_the_Man]

I'll put a line through Brisbane if they don't win. Geelong more likely to overcome the stat.

I’d probably go the other way if I was forced to pick.

 

[iluvparis]

How many of the 58 did it actually tell us anything about?


Either side can overcome it. They will be one game outside of the top 8, and last year they both made finals by well more than one game. As long as the loser tonight is competitive, there’s not much reason to doubt they’ll be about as good as they were last year - and that’s good enough to make up one game.

History suggests otherwise

 

[Cuzz09]

whats the difference between being 1-2 but you won week 1 and being 1-2 and winning round 3?

 

[Billy ray]

whats the difference between being 1-2 but you won week 1 and being 1-2 and winning round 3?

someone needs to do the stat 1-2 after 3 weeks where you were 1-1 after week 2

 

[My Tilly]

I'll put a line through Brisbane if they don't win. Geelong more likely to overcome the stat.

Based on nothing more than hype.
Don't forget, we got as far as we did last year having had a charmed run with injuries compared to most other competitors.
The shorted quarters and season greatly attributed to our finish. Geelong typically falls away by rounds 20-22.

They go 0-2, they are not getting close to a grand final, let alone winning the flag.

 

[HTT]

History suggests otherwise

Teams that made finals one year and started 0-2 the next (and their result)
2020: Western Bulldogs (made finals)
2019: Melbourne (missed finals)
2018: none
2017: Sydney (made finals)
2016: Fremantle (missed finals)
2015: Port Adelaide (missed finals), Geelong (missed finals)
2014: Carlton (missed finals), Sydney (made finals)

Thats 3 that made it and 5 that didn’t.
4 of the 5 that didn’t make it were spanked in one of their first two games (the 5th being Carlton), so as long as tonight is competitive, both sides will be in it up to their eyeballs.

It’s hardly an irrecoverable situation for a good team.

 

[iluvparis]

someone needs to do the stat 1-2 after 3 weeks where you were 1-1 after week 2

Ron The Bear - is this right up your alley?

 

[iluvparis]

Teams that made finals one year and started 0-2 the next (and their result)
2020: Western Bulldogs (made finals)
2019: Melbourne (missed finals)
2018: none
2017: Sydney (made finals)
2016: Fremantle (missed finals)
2015: Port Adelaide (missed finals), Geelong (missed finals)
2014: Carlton (missed finals), Sydney (made finals)

Thats 3 that made it and 5 that didn’t.
4 of the 5 that didn’t make it were spanked in one of their first two games (the 5th being Carlton), so as long as tonight is competitive, both sides will be in it up to their eyeballs.

It’s hardly an irrecoverable situation for a good team.

So 3 out of 8 made it - how does that compare to teams making finals from one year to the next - so your data is actually evidence that the theory has merit.

 

[HTT]

So 3 out of 8 made it - how does that compare to teams making finals from one year to the next - so your data is actually evidence that the theory has merit.

I don’t think being 0-2 is in itself telling. It is an example of correlation, not causation. Being a poor team leads to both starting 0-2, and missing finals, so teams that do one, are likely to do both. The headline stat is mostly contributed to by teams that were poor the year before, and continued to be poor. That’s not surprising at all.
When you take those out, the effect is not nearly so pronounced. From an admittedly small sample, it is pretty even. Each case should be judged on their merit. As long as tonight’s game is competitive (and a high quality game), neither side should be particularly concerned.

 

[Billy ray]

whats the best record any team has ever had and NOT made the finals?
i know it will be different in final 5/6/8 seasons, but best ever under each finals system?

 

[iluvparis]

I don’t think being 0-2 is in itself telling. It is an example of correlation, not causation. Being a poor team leads to both starting 0-2, and missing finals, so teams that do one, are likely to do both. The headline stat is mostly contributed to by teams that were poor the year before, and continued to be poor. That’s not surprising at all.
When you take those out, the effect is not nearly so pronounced. From an admittedly small sample, it is pretty even. Each case should be judged on their merit. As long as tonight’s game is competitive (and a high quality game), neither side should be particularly concerned.

Yes it is a correlation but it is 100% driven by a causal factor - the cause being a team is bad - this leads them to start 0-2 and miss finals - I can't fathom how anyone could see otherwise.

 

[Ricky Vaughn]

whats the best record any team has ever had and NOT made the finals?
i know it will be different in final 5/6/8 seasons, but best ever under each finals system?

Essendon went 14-8 and missed Finals one year. That's pretty unlucky.

 

[HTT]

Yes it is a correlation but it is 100% driven by a causal factor - the cause being a team is bad - this leads them to start 0-2 and miss finals - I can't fathom how anyone could see otherwise.

So being 0-2 in itself is not a line through your premiership chances, it is being a poor team.