Indians prospect Giovany Urshela injures knee in winter ball
November 18, 2014Browns waive running back Ben Tate
November 18, 2014I blamed CBS. Well, mostly. I couldn’t solely blame the multi-billion dollar corporation, one-stop center for television programming for the elderly, and purveyor of such classic sitcoms as Everybody Loves Raymond, Two and a Half Men, and The Big Bang Theory.1 I couldn’t even blame Steve Beuerlein. It was more the fault of the universal karmic forces holding the universe together, the mischievous assistant director in the broadcasting booth or production van, and whatever combination of tubes, wires, antennae and radio waves that beamed the information onto the television in front of me. It would be unfair to hold CBS, the media conglomerate broadcasting the game, personally responsible. But I did it anyway.
What had me holding CBS accountable for screwing up my Sunday morning was a graphic they had posted with three and a half minutes remaining in the second quarter of the game between the Cleveland Browns and the Houston Texans. With the Browns driving to take the lead in the red zone, the CBS broadcasting team elected to air an image showing that the Browns had gone a miraculous 99 consecutive drives in the red zone without coughing up a turnover. This was the longest active streak in the NFL.
Anyone who has ever cared one iota about sports or even watched a sporting event knew that this graphic spelled imminent disaster. Like the brazen mountain-dweller in a disaster movie telling the handsome geologist, “Well I wouldn’t worry about that, that volcano hasn’t erupted in darn near five hundred years!” the graphic foreshadowed probable tragedy. Why tempt fate? Why jinx the Browns, CBS? Why? Instead of letting the pitcher who’s pitched seven runner-less innings sit quietly at the end of the bench, CBS walked up to him and loudly reminded him and everyone from the dugout to the nosebleeds that he was six outs away from a perfect game. Needless to say, Browns running back Isaiah Crowell fumbled the ball on the next play. The Texans recovered the ball, snapping the Browns’ streak of fastidiousness in the red zone and prompting Browns fans round the world to curse the ill-timed graphic.
Of course neither CBS nor any broadcasting network has the power to alter the course of the future by innocently showing a statistic. Also, given the way the rest of the game unfolded, it doesn’t appear that a second-quarter fumble would have changed the final result, a 23-7 victory for the Texans. But for Browns fans, who have endured six consecutive losing seasons and are wildly paranoid of supernatural forces that appear to conspire against them year after year, it seemed cruel for CBS to witch what had been a fifty-yard drive.
What’s more, this particular Browns team, which was in first place for the first time since 1994 at the time of this streak-snapping fumble, seems to crumble under the weight of any positive attention. The best way to tell how the public perceives a team is by looking at the point spread relied upon by gamblers, because the ultimate goal of bookmakers is to have equal action on both sides of the spread. Because of this, the spread usually settles around a point spread indicative of how good or bad the public thinks a team is.2 For instance, when the Browns are favored by seven points, it indicates that the public thinks the Browns are pretty good, and should win by about seven points. When the Browns are getting three points at home, this shows that the public thinks little of the Browns, and expects them to lose at home.
As clear favorites, the Cleveland Browns score just 14.5 points per game, more than ten less than the 25.4 points per game they score as underdogs.
But believe it or not, the Browns have been fairly good front-runners since 1999, going 29-29-1 against the spread when they’ve been favored.4 This isn’t a bad number. Neither is their win percentage of 54.2 percent in games in which they’ve been favored, given that the Browns are normally not favored by very many points when they are. The Browns have only been moderate or big favorites in a stunning 23 games since 1999, i.e., they were favored by four or more points. In those games, the Browns have gone 12-11-0 against the spread, with fourteen wins and nine losses. The only thing unacceptable about those numbers is the rarity with which the Browns lay four or more points.
This season, the Browns have greatly exceeded expectations overall, but have been unable to act accordingly once the public starts to think they’re any good. Presently, the Browns are 6-4 with a 6-3-1 record against the spread; good stuff. However, they’re a bothersome 1-3 against the spread with two wins and two losses when giving their opponent more than three points, what we’ll call being a “clear favorite” for convenience.5 This is a sign that they don’t cope with positive attention particularly well.
What’s worse are the way the Browns have played in games in which they’ve been favored, even where they’ve won or covered. This is especially true of the Browns offense and quarterback Brian Hoyer. As clear favorites, the Browns score only 14.5 points per game, more than ten less than the 25.4 points per game they score as underdogs. The Browns offense, which has been fairly responsible with the ball this season, turns the ball over more than three times as much when they’re clear favorites. Four of Brian Hoyer’s five interceptions on the season occurred in games where the Browns were clear favorites.
Although the lack of a larger sample size can’t make these figures definitive, they back up the eye test in those games. The Browns were not a clear favorite against any opponent until they walloped the Steelers in week five, 31-10. The next week, they played the lowly Jacksonville Jaguars on the road, who were winless at the time.6 Brian Hoyer started hearing talk of a new contract with more zeros, receiving sandwich endorsements, and presumably scandalous Twitter DMs from grateful Browns fans. The morning before the Jacksonville game, CBS (yes, them again) ran a positive piece on Brian Hoyer before the Browns lost by eighteen in a game in which they were favored by four. They struggled mightily in the ensuing two games, when they were favored by 6.5 points and 7 points, respectively (they did win both games, albeit by narrow margins).
Then, as 6.5-point underdogs in Cincinnati, the Browns played their most complete game of the year, embarrassing the Bengals 24-3 in the their home stadium on a Thursday night seemingly designed to end the Browns’ winning ways. In the wake of its domination of Cincinnati, Cleveland rode a first place high into Sunday’s home game against the Texans, and played losing football from start to finish as Coach Mike Pettine watched his team in disappointment, his stern appearance and camouflage hat making him look like Stone Cold Steve Austin on a weekend duck-hunting trip. They were 3.5-point favorites.
So with the Browns fans and the American public yet again doing a one-eighty on a 6-4 Browns team, smart Browns fan should be happy that, yet again, no one believes in them.The Browns have been anemic, bland, and unimpressive in games in which they’ve been favored. But team appears to have embraced the underdog role, in true Cleveland fashion, playing well against teams like the New Orleans Saints and Cincinnati Bengals that the public thought was much better than them. The Browns don’t want your approval! Hopefully this is a positive sign for this week, as the Browns are 3.5-point underdogs on the road against a positively mediocre 4-6 Atlanta Falcons team. Another good sign: All-Pro receive Josh Gordon returns this week, but shh!, don’t tell anyone, because the 2014 Browns are better when no one’s talking about them.
____________________
- Yes, I’m trolling you, Internet. [↩]
- Point spreads aren’t perfect at indicating public perception of a team, but they’re close. Games with unique circumstances, “public” teams, Vegas-friendly teams, old-fashioned superstitions, or those with well-liked athletes may cause the spread to deviate from perception slightly. [↩]
- The Browns have won 33.2 percent of their games, so they’ve exceeded the public’s perception of them by a rate of nearly ten percent. The Browns have won 33 percent of their games, not 23 percent: Take that, America! [↩]
- This means that the Browns outperformed the spread, or “covered,” by winning by more points than they were giving or losing by less points than they were getting. [↩]
- These are all sample sizes, which is mostly true for any NFL sample size. But small sample sizes are what keep teams in and out of the playoffs every year in the NFL. [↩]
- The Jaguars are also winless since, depressingly. [↩]
8 Comments
This team does seem to do better when they are discounted and underdogs. I just find it funny how all of the local “experts” on tv, radio and twitter ping pong back and forth on this team.
seems to crumble under the weight of any positive attention
Or when we face a good DL, we have no offense. JAX only team strength, Houston’s obvious strength, TB w/ McCoy, Oakland pretty decent DL(Tuck, A.Smith).
If we face an OL that can run-block, then it’s even tougher for us (Pitt, Baltimore, Houston, JAX the toughest we have faced thus far —- got sort of lucky that Cinci’s OL was so banged up for our game).
If you don’t have a QB difference-maker, then the game is truly won or lost on the line of scrimmage. This edition of the Browns has demonstrated that edict rather well.
By that metric, it’s what, 2-4 the rest of the way? 1-5? Both are entirely possible, unfortunately.
But I think this has a lot of merit, especially considering the running game has been generally atrocious since Mack went down.
Johnny Manziel part of baseball card set:
http://hallofverygood.com/2014-articles/johnny-manziel-part-of-baseball-card-set.html
What? Why are you giving up hope on the season?
Buffalo has a good DL. Baltimore has a good OL. It’s not like we are facing another team that should dominate things like Houston did at the LOS.
We could go 2-4, but I think 4-2 is just as likely. We “should” beat Atlanta, “should” lose to Indy, and the rest of the games are straight toss-ups. That reads 3-3 though you never know in the NFL.
Browns actually have a good matchup vs Indy. It will be cold in CLE, and Indy is not great against the run, and they are not good at running the ball. All depends on how Luck plays. Indy has 2 home games then comes to CLE (unfortunately plays in DC before CLE so it will be 2 cold in a row), CLE has 2 road games and then comes home.
yeah, it’s not the worst matchup in the world, but it also depends on us getting some pressure because Luck would score 40+ if we give him the time we gave Mallet.
CBS can’t alter causality, but they can have the game on a bit of a delay to troll. There are outside factors working against us.