Injuries Vs. Wins (Our Injuries are Overstated)

[*ochocincos*]

(01-05-2021, 03:59 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I just came across this on Twitter, and I thought it was interesting.  Here is chart that shows the total amount of games missed (left to right) and the win total (up and down).



I can't exactly make out who had more injuries between us and teams like Tampa and Buffalo, as they're too close on the graph.  But I think we can all agree they're comparable in number.

Here are the teams who had less total injuries than us: Atlanta, Miami, Los Angeles, Indy, Arizona, Houston, Pittsburgh.

Here are the teams who had a comparable amount of injuries: Cincinnati, Buffalo, and Tampa.

That leaves the remaining 22 teams with more games missed due to injury than us. 

I've seen quite a few people compare our situation to San Fran.  You might want to rethink that (look at them on graph).  They had over 300 missed games due to injury whereas we had around 125.

I've long held the belief that our injury situation is completely overstated by some who look for reasons to defend our lack of success.  This seems to illustrate my point rather well.

The Bengals didn't do a good enough mitigating risk when it came to their starters, and/or they really wouldn't have been very good even with most/all of their planned starters.